On 9/16/07, Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 16/09/2007, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sep 15, 2007, at 10:00 PM, Nicholas Bastin wrote: > > > Then lets stop beating around the bush and implement an immutable > > > bytes type. Why put ourselves through contortions trying to jam a > > > square peg into a round hole and not just decide to make a round peg? > > > > +42 !!!! > > I knew this would come up again when I made that comment - I > deliberately didn't express an opinion then, as I didn't want to > obscure the point. But I'll come off the fence and admit that I'm also > in favour of an immutable bytes type (and for bytes literals to be of > that type). > > Paul.
FYI - my first patch in the bytes object support for PyBUF_LOCKDATA thread added support for immutable bytes. I didn't add a hash method yet but that should be trivial. Should the hash method raise an exception when set_immutable has not been called yet or should it call set_immutable? I'm in favor of the exception. side effects are bad. -gps _______________________________________________ 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
