Travis E. Oliphant schrieb: >> As I unification mechanism, I think it is insufficient. I doubt it >> can express all the concepts that ctypes supports. >> > > Please clarify what you mean. > > Are you saying that a single object can't carry all the information > about binary data that ctypes allows with it's multi-object approach?
I'm not sure what you mean by "single object". If I use the tuple syntax, e.g. datatype((float, (3,2)) There are also multiple objects (the float, the 3, and the 2). You get a single "root" object back, but so do you in ctypes. But this isn't really what I meant. Instead, I think the PEP lacks various concepts from C data types, such as pointers, unions, function pointers, alignment/packing. > In the mean-time, how are other packages supposed to communicate binary > information about data with each other? This is my other question. Why should they? > Remember the context that the data-format object is presented in. Two > packages need to share a chunk of memory (the package authors do not > know each other and only have and Python as a common reference). They > both want to describe that the memory they are sharing has some > underlying binary structure. Can you please give an example of such two packages, and an application that needs them share data? Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ 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