Terry J. Reedy <[email protected]> added the comment:
I agree that the _sampwidth multiplier is needed regardless of endianness.
The simplest option would be to pull the _datawritten statement out of the
alternation, making the code read
if self._sampwidth > 1 and big_endian:
import array
data = array.array(_array_fmts[self._sampwidth], data)
data.byteswap()
data.tofile(self._file)
else:
self._file.write(data)
self._datawritten = self._datawritten + len(data) * self._sampwidth
Note: while _sampwidth is initialized to 0, _ensure_header_written() checks
that it is not 0, and it is used elsewhere as a divisor.
The above adds a usually unneeded multiply by 1, but the alternative requires
duplication of _file.write and two _datawritten statements
if self._sampwidth > 1:
if big_endian:
import array
data = array.array(_array_fmts[self._sampwidth], data)
data.byteswap()
data.tofile(self._file)
else: # little_endian
self._file.write(data)
self._datawritten = self._datawritten + len(data) * self._sampwidth
else: # _sampwidth == 1
self._file.write(data)
self._datawritten = self._datawritten + len(data)
This module is new to me. Can you think of any way to test this issue, perhaps
by writing to StringIO file? This is not a heavily tested module ;-)
In 3.3, the openfp synonym for open could perhaps be deprecated.
----------
nosy: +terry.reedy
versions: +Python 3.1, Python 3.2
_______________________________________
Python tracker <[email protected]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue11126>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
