Steve Schveighoffer: > No, please no! Do I really need to carry around an integer that is going > to be unused 99.9% of the time (In my case, probably 100%)? I'd rather > have a special type that has a stride.
Strides aren't essential, but once in a while they are useful, I use them now and then in Python. How can you tell that you don't need them so strongly? But I agree that passing 3-structs is slower than 2-structs (having a "slice with stride" type in some standard library can be enough). > Would be nice to specify an allocation strategy for > arrays too, so we can avoid some of the issues being discussed about the > GC allocating gigabytes for a 40MB array. Just fixing the bug and putting there a sensible default seems more than enough to me. Variable allocation strategies are fine for library-defined arrays, but built-ins are better kept simple and flexible and efficient. Bye, bearophile