On Jan 22, 7:49 am, Aaron Brady <castiro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > I am trying to create a mapping class similar to the base dictionary, > but with some added behaviors that affect pointers on a low level. I > have a bare-bones version I compiled with MinGW, and it is working! I > want to know if there is anything that is going to bite me later, when > I start adding real behavior: for example, times when my overrides > won't get called, shortcuts, better macros, etc. > > Later on, I will be altering the 'ma_table' field from one call to > another, overriding most of PyDict_Type's methods with before-and- > after code, adding synchronization, and copying-and-pasting memory > allocation code from 'dictobject.c' directly in, since I need the > object to be at specific addresses. Anything I need to beware of? > Any reason it might be infeasible? > > 108 lines, please snip on reply.
I would also like to know if there is any chance my subclass can use the native garbage collection. For instance, if I could write my own PyObject_MALLOC, then I could use _PyObject_GC_New. It doesn't look promising, since the stuff is all so hard-coded. For instance, '_PyObject_GC_Malloc' uses some module-level variables that make it impossible to duplicate the code, since they are out of scope from my code. What do you think? Is it possible? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
