Message77180
| Author |
amaury.forgeotdarc |
| Recipients |
amaury.forgeotdarc, christian.heimes, giampaolo.rodola, ialbert, pitrou |
| Date |
2008年12月06日.22:48:37 |
| SpamBayes Score |
4.064486e-06 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1228603718.23.0.209098567864.issue4565@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> I'm a bit surprised by the adopted approach.
> It seems you are merely translating the Python code into C.
> I think the proper approach for the buffered IO classes would be
> to use a fixed-size buffer which never gets reallocated.
You are certainly right, but the code io.py is already difficult to understand and
maintain; the corresponding C code adds one level of complexity;
had I changed the buffering strategy at the same time, it would have been impossible
to ensure a correct implementation.
Now that my C implementation of the Buffered classes seems correct (all tests pass,
except a few about destructors) we could try alternative approaches. |
|