Martin Panter added the comment:
A different test case for “unused_data” attribute was added in 2012 for Issue
16350, so that part is no longer needed.
If this feature goes ahead, it might be nice to also update the bzip and LZMA
modules for consistency.
In Python 3, the equivalent of the
R. David Murray added the comment:
Moving this from commit review back to no selection, since there doesn't yet
seem to be an agreement on an API.
--
nosy: +r.david.murray
stage: commit review -
versions: +Python 3.5 -Python 3.2
___
Python tracker
Changes by Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk:
--
nosy: -BreamoreBoy
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5804
___
___
Changes by Nadeem Vawda nadeem.va...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +nadeem.vawda
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5804
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Kristján Valur Jónsson krist...@ccpgames.com added the comment:
decompressobj is indeed enough. But if you are doing a lot of this
(decompressing chunks), then using the unused_data, as it is, involves a lot of
copying.
If there were a unused_data_pos or some equivalent, then it would be
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc amaur...@gmail.com added the comment:
The function returns different kind of data depending on the value of the last
parameter. I don't like it at all.
Why is decompressobj not enough?
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
___
Python
Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk added the comment:
This has been reviewed see msg87550, can we get this into 3.2?
--
nosy: +BreamoreBoy
stage: patch review - commit review
versions: +Python 3.2 -Python 2.7, Python 3.1
___
Python tracker
Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net added the comment:
Well, I think its relatively uncommon to be doing such a loop with a
static buffer anyway - often you'll instead be reading from disk or a
network stream; if we could make those cases simpler and avoid copying
that would be great.
Changes by Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org:
--
nosy: +gregory.p.smith
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5804
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org added the comment:
Overall, this looks good. Some mostly minor comments in this review.
http://codereview.appspot.com/63060/diff/1/2
File Doc/library/zlib.rst (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/63060/diff/1/2#newcode136
Line 136: When specified, it will
Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net added the comment:
Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't the offset parameter just another
way of spelling
buffer(input, offset)?
I like the avoiding of copying, just wondering if having a magic
parameter to get a tuple is really better than (say)
11 matches
Mail list logo
