You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Let's assume that somewhere in the future, abstract-leveldown has reached feature parity with levelup. Then subleveldown won't need to unwrap levelup and deferred-leveldown, nor will it need to rewrap. Issues like #60 will be gone.
Whether it will need to unwrap/rewrap encoding-down is an open question. In any case we'll have more options to feature-detect: subleveldown might detect db.type === 'encoding-down' or db.supports.encodings.
In the latter case maybesubleveldown will be able to "punch through" the encodings of its input db by using { keyEncoding: 'binary' } internally, and still support encodings externally (assuming that'll be an abstract-leveldown feature). That would be quite nice.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Dumping some thoughts. A couple of efforts are underway and relevant to
subleveldown
:type
(Add type property to levelup and abstract-leveldown implementations community#82)Let's assume that somewhere in the future,
abstract-leveldown
has reached feature parity withlevelup
. Thensubleveldown
won't need to unwraplevelup
anddeferred-leveldown
, nor will it need to rewrap. Issues like #60 will be gone.Whether it will need to unwrap/rewrap
encoding-down
is an open question. In any case we'll have more options to feature-detect:subleveldown
might detectdb.type === 'encoding-down'
ordb.supports.encodings
.In the latter case maybe
subleveldown
will be able to "punch through" the encodings of its input db by using{ keyEncoding: 'binary' }
internally, and still support encodings externally (assuming that'll be anabstract-leveldown
feature). That would be quite nice.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: