Travis E. Oliphant schrieb: > Travis E. Oliphant wrote: >> Thanks for all the comments that have been given on the data-type >> (data-format) PEP. I'd like opinions on an idea for revising the PEP I >> have. > >> >> 1) We could define a special string-syntax (or list syntax) that covers >> every special case. The array interface specification goes this >> direction and it requires no new Python types. This could also be seen >> as an extension of the "struct" module to allow for nested structures, etc. >> >> 2) We could define a Python object that specifically carries data-format >> information. >> >> >> Does that explain the goal of what I'm trying to do better? > > In other-words, what I'm saying is I really want a PEP that does this. > Could we have a discussion about what the best way to communicate > data-format information across multiple extension modules would look > like. I'm not saying my (pre-)PEP is best. The point of putting it in > it's infant state out there is to get the discussion rolling, not to > claim I've got all the answers.
IIUC, so far the 'data-object' carries information about the structure of the data it describes. Couldn't it go a step further and have also some functionality? Converting the data into a Python object and back? This is what the ctypes SETFUNC and GETFUNC functions do, and what also is implemented in the struct module... Thomas _______________________________________________ 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
