On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Rene Rivera <grafikro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Matthew Scouten (TT) wrote: >> >> I can work with whatever you come up with, but it might convenient if a >> char* or char[] was treated as a bytes object and a std::string was >> treated as a string. Thoughts? > > A char* can never be fully treated as a bytes object. You must mean a char* > plus a size_t (or two char* iterator pointers). At which point any > convenience you think you are getting from treating char* as bytes is gone > as you have to introduce an intermediate type anyway to put in the "buffer" > semantics. Hence you are better off with real buffer objects, or equivalents > thereof. Say a std::pair<char*,char*> iterator range, or std::vector<char>, > etc. >
Indeed char* is usually represent a string. For raw buffer there's a 'buffer' type in Python may be suitable in this case. So we would like to just provide a converter and just let user to specify it if a raw buffer is required. -- Haoyu Bai _______________________________________________ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
