Josiah Carlson schrieb:
> What about a tree structure over the top of the string as I described in
> another post? If there are no surrogate pairs, the pointer to the tree
> is null. If there are surrogate pairs, we could either use the
> structure as I described, or even modify it so that we get
gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > Gábor Farkas schrieb:
[snip]
> > Python is not aiming at 100% portability at all costs. Many aspects
> > are platform dependent, and while this has complicated some
> > applications, is has simplified others (which could make use of
> >
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Gábor Farkas schrieb:
>> while i understand the constraints, i think it's not a good decision to
>> leave this to be implementation-dependent.
>>
>> the strings seem to me as such a basic functionality, that it's
>> behaviour should not depend on the platform.
>>
>> for e
Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > I think supporting multiple representations at run-time would really
> > be terrible. Any API of the "give me the data" kind would either have
> > to expose the choice of representations, or perform a copy.
>
> Unless you can g
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josiah Carlson schrieb:
> > For me, having recently remembered what was in a unicode string, and
> > verifying it by checking the source, the question in my mind is whether
> > we want to stick with the same 2-representation implementation (default
>
Talin schrieb:
> I wonder if there is a way to create an API for extension modules that
> would allow a gradual phase-out of reference counting, towards a 'pure' GC.
>
> (Let's leave aside the merits of reference counting vs. non-reference
> counting for another thread - please.)
>
> Most of th
Christian Tanzer wrote:
> I don't use __ for `private`, I use it for making cooperative super
> calls (and `__super` occurs 1397 in my sandbox).
I think you might be confusing the symptom for the disease. To me, your mail
means that Py3k should grow some syntactic sugar for super calls. I guess i
I wonder if there is a way to create an API for extension modules that
would allow a gradual phase-out of reference counting, towards a 'pure' GC.
(Let's leave aside the merits of reference counting vs. non-reference
counting for another thread - please.)
Most of the discussion up to this point
Fredrik Lundh schrieb:
>> I don't think reducing memory consumption is that important, for current
>> hardware. Java and .NET have demonstrated that you can do "real"
>> application with that approach.
>
> I've spent more time optimizing Python's string types than most, and
> that doesn't match m
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> I don't think reducing memory consumption is that important, for current
> hardware. Java and .NET have demonstrated that you can do "real"
> application with that approach.
I've spent more time optimizing Python's string types than most, and
that doesn't match my experi
"Bob Ippolito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/22/06, Thomas Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Bob Ippolito schrieb:
> > > On 9/22/06, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> On Friday 22 September 2006 13:05, Christian Tanzer wrote:
> > >> > It is useful in some situations, t
11 matches
Mail list logo
