Travis E. Oliphant wrote: > Yes, this was the reason for my dtype object. But, I think that folks > felt it was too much, especially since the struct-style syntax is > already there in Python.
Making it a full-blown Python object would be too much for this application. But it could be something like an array of structs containing a type code and a size. > Besides not allowing for the request of a "contiguous" buffer Add an argument as appropriate. > you are also not describing how allocation for > this array of structs will be handled. That's up to the base object. Something with a fixed number of dimensions (as I expect most objects implementing this protocol will) can store it in the object itself. If the number of dimensions can vary, it might have to malloc/realloc. But that doesn't seem like a difficult thing to do. -- Greg _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
