Josiah Carlson wrote:
> "Travis E. Oliphant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> abstractly as if it were. I believe, the PIL is where the idea of
>> multiple buffer segments in the original buffer interface came
>> from, I believe.
>
> Remove the last "I believe" in that sentence and remove the commas. ;)
>
>> The buffer interface should allow discontiguous memory areas to
>> share standard striding information. However, consumers that do
>> not want to deal with strided memory should also be able to
>> request a contiguous segment easily.
>
> I don't believe this is necessary. While the point of the buffer
> interface is to offer direct access to memory regions of an object or
> structure, being able to ask "can I get a contiguous segment" isn't
> really reasonable. The response is either going to be "yes, that's how I
> represent it anyways" or "no, that's not how I represent the data". But
> this bit of meta information is easily acquired by *getting* the buffer
> and checking the stride.
I think the point is for there to be something in the standard library
or Python core that makes it easy for a consumer to *copy* the data to a
contiguous memory segment in the event the consumer can't directly
handle non-contiguous data (e.g. a C API function that takes the source
object, a pointer to the destination memory block, and an optional slice
object defining a subsection of the memory block to be retrieved)
Regards,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
