> So, the only criticism I have, intuitively, is that the unicode > structure seems to become a bit too large. For example, I'm not sure you > need a generic (pointer, size) pair in addition to the > representation-specific ones.
It's not really a generic pointer, but rather a variable-sized pointer. It may not fit into any of the other representations (e.g. if there is a four-byte wchar_t, then a two-byte representation would fit neither into the UTF-8 pointer nor into the wchar_t pointer). > Incidentally, to slightly reduce the overhead the unicode objects, > there's this proposal: http://bugs.python.org/issue1943 I wonder what aspects of this patch and discussion should be integrated into the PEP. The notion of allocating the memory in the same block is already considered in the PEP; what else might be relevant? Input is welcome! 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
