On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 09:38:35 -0800, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bengt Richter) wrote: >> Martin v. Lowis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >Bengt Richter wrote: >> >>>The typical way of processing incoming ints in C is through >> >>>PyArg_ParseTuple, which already has the code to coerce long->int >> >>>(which in turn may raise an exception for a range violation). >> >>> >> >>>So for typical C code, 0x80000004 is a perfect bit mask in Python 2.4. >> >> >> >> Ok, I'll take your word that 'k' coercion takes no significant time for >> >> longs vs ints. >> > >> >I didn't say that 'k' takes no significant time for longs vs ints. In >> >fact, I did not make any performance claims. I don't know what the >> >relative performance is. >> >> Sorry, I apologize for putting words in your mouth. > >In regards to the aesthetics and/or inconsistancies of: > >>> -0x80000000 > -2147483648L > >>> -2147483648 > -2147483648 > >>> -(2147483648) > -2147483648L > >1. If your Python code distinguishes between ints and longs, it has a >bug. Are you just lecturing me personally (in which case off list would be more appropriate), or do you include the authors of the 17 files I count under <some prefix>/Lib that have isinstance(<something>, int) in them? Or would you like to rephrase that with suitable qualifications? ;-) > >2. If your C extension to Python isn't using the 'k' format specifier as >Martin is telling you to, then your C extension has a bug. I respect Martin's expert knowledge and manner of communication. He said, "Just have a look at the 'k' specifier in PyArg_ParseTuple." Regards, Bengt Richter _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
