Raymond Hettinger added the comment:
The current wording seems to have sufficed for users of the C API. Also, it is
an implementation detail subject to change. Discussions on being able to
mutate anything in C are covered in the ctypes module.
--
resolution: accepted -> not a bug
Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment:
The range of interned ints was once much smaller, but it was expanded upwards
to 256 so that the bytes extracted from bytes and bytearray objects, as when
indexing or iterating, would *all* be pre-allocated objects. I should presume
that
Changes by Ned Batchelder ned...@users.sourceforge.net:
--
nosy: +nedbat
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11846
___
___
Anthony Long antl...@gmail.com added the comment:
I'll have a doc patch shortly.
Also, I am working on defining a solid range. Memory is not an issue like it
was back in 1991 when this range was originally implemented, so we can go
higher and get a bigger performance boost. This will be very
Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com added the comment:
Memory is not an issue like it was back in 1991 when
this range was originally implemented, so we can go
higher and get a bigger performance boost.
Please don't do this. Memory is still important to a lot of people. Also,
Anthony Long antl...@gmail.com added the comment:
My plan is to document it, as it exists, in the current implementation. That's
a start atleast, and will provide an entry point for further documentation in
the future should it be changed again.
--
