This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | schuppenies |
|---|---|
| Recipients | georg.brandl, schuppenies |
| Date | 2008年05月17日.11:00:24 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.0012603422 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1211022029.77.0.684293335319.issue2898@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> Can't you write this as a simple Python function using > type.__basicsize__ and type.__itemsize__? Yes, it would be possible and has been done, e.g. http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/Python/Recipe/546530. The problem is though, that it requires handling of all special cases externally. Any changes need to be addressed separately and unknown type definitions cannot be addressed at all. Also I figured the programmer implementing a type would know best about its size. Another point is different architectures which result in different object sizes. > In any case, if this is added somewhere it should not be a builtin. What place would you consider to be appropriate? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008年05月17日 11:00:32 | schuppenies | set | spambayes_score: 0.00126034 -> 0.0012603422 recipients: + schuppenies, georg.brandl |
| 2008年05月17日 11:00:29 | schuppenies | set | spambayes_score: 0.00126034 -> 0.00126034 messageid: <1211022029.77.0.684293335319.issue2898@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008年05月17日 11:00:27 | schuppenies | link | issue2898 messages |
| 2008年05月17日 11:00:25 | schuppenies | create | |