[issue17152] Array module should support boolean natively

2013-02-11 Thread Jesús Cea Avión

Jesús Cea Avión added the comment:

we have a -1, so I close this as rejected.

I still think it is a valuable idea to pursuit.

--
resolution:  - rejected
status: open - closed

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17152
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue17152] Array module should support boolean natively

2013-02-11 Thread Jesús Cea Avión

Changes by Jesús Cea Avión j...@jcea.es:


--
stage:  - committed/rejected

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17152
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue17152] Array module should support boolean natively

2013-02-09 Thread Mark Dickinson

Mark Dickinson added the comment:

There's already a fairly well known 3rd-party library for this:

http://pypi.python.org/pypi/bitarray/

I'd be -1 on putting something like this in the standard library:  the array 
module doesn't get enough maintenance as it is, and a packed bit array sounds 
like a specialist need.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17152
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue17152] Array module should support boolean natively

2013-02-08 Thread Terry J. Reedy

Terry J. Reedy added the comment:

You are proposing a bit array. Whether the bits are interpreted or displayed as 
0/1 or f/t or False/True is secondary. The problem is that bit arrays do not 
fit the array model, with its minimum byte size per element of 1. There are 
other aspects of arrays that do not fit either. What would .itemsize() return? 
fractions. Fraction(1,8)? In any case, the internal implementation will be 
substantially different.

So I suggest that the proposal be to add an array.bitarray class. The bit 
representation strings '0'/'1', 'f'/'t', 'False'/'True' could be parameters. 
Omit typecode, typecodes, amd itemsize attributes and byteswap and (to or 
from)string methods. The buffer_info method would need redefinition. Should 
(to/from)(bytes/file) use 1 byte per bit (is so, which ones) or pack 8 bits per 
byte? It would be sensible to add bitwise operators (~, , |, ^) on bit arrays 
of the same length. An implementation decision is the granularity of the 
internal storage (1, 2, 4, or possibly 8 bytes on 64 bit systems -- or just use 
3.x ints).  The insert/delete methods might be omitted, but implementation of 
such should be similar to the shift methods for integers, which have the same 
problem of moving bits between internal implementation chunks.

I suspect that many have implemented versions of this in Python (as well as 
other languages) using bytes or ints with masks. I suggest you present the idea 
on python-ideas list to garner more support -- and be prepred to write a PEP 
for a new class.

I suspect that the relative ease of using ints as bit arrays will be an 
argument against such an addition. That is why they have the bit operations. On 
the other hand, one might argue that the inclusion of bit operations 
acknowledges the need for bit arrays.

--
nosy: +terry.reedy

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17152
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue17152] Array module should support boolean natively

2013-02-07 Thread Jesús Cea Avión

New submission from Jesús Cea Avión:

Array module is used, frequently, as a convenient way of saving a lot of 
memory. I think we should support boolean typeobject natively. Implementation 
should be trivial and efficient, except methods like pop() (a bit convoluted, 
but doable).

Opinions?.

--
keywords: easy
messages: 181623
nosy: jcea
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Array module should support boolean natively
type: enhancement
versions: Python 3.4

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17152
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue17152] Array module should support boolean natively

2013-02-07 Thread Mark Dickinson

Mark Dickinson added the comment:

What do you mean by 'natively'?  How much space do you envisage each bool 
taking?  That is, are you suggesting a packed bool representation with 8 
entries to a byte, or storing one bool per byte, or something else?

--
nosy: +mark.dickinson

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17152
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue17152] Array module should support boolean natively

2013-02-07 Thread Jesús Cea Avión

Jesús Cea Avión added the comment:

1 byte = 8 bools.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17152
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com