Ron Adam wrote: > Storing byte information as 16 or 32 bits ints could take up a rather > lot of memory in some cases.
I don't quite see the point here. Inside a bytes object, they would be stored 1 byte per byte. Nobody is suggesting that they would take up more than that just because a_bytes_object[i] happens to return an int. So the only reason to introduce a new "byte" type is to remove some of the operations that int has. We can already do bitwise operations on an int, so we don't need a new type to add that capability. What's more, I can see this leading to people asking for arithmetic operations to be *added* to the byte type so they can do wrap-around arithmetic, and then for 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit etc. versions of it, etc. etc. Do we really want to get onto that slope? Greg _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
