> Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >>> import unicode
> > > > > > >>> import marshal
> > > > > > >>> u = unicode.unicode
> > > > > > >>> s = u("foo")
> > > > > > >>> data = marshal.dumps(s)
> > > > > > >>> marshal.loads(data)
> > > > > > 'f\000o\000o\000'
> > > > > > >>> type(marshal.loads(data))
> > > > > > <type 'string'>
> >
> > > > Why do Unicode objects implement the bf_getcharbuffer slot ? I thought
> > > > that unicode objects use a two-byte character representation.
> >
> > Unicode objects should *not* implement the getcharbuffer slot. Only
> > read, write, and segcount.
>
> unicode objects do not implement the getcharbuffer slot.
> here's the relevant descriptor:
>
> static PyBufferProcs unicode_as_buffer = {
> (getreadbufferproc) unicode_buffer_getreadbuf,
> (getwritebufferproc) unicode_buffer_getwritebuf,
> (getsegcountproc) unicode_buffer_getsegcount
> };
>
> the array module uses a similar descriptor.
>
> maybe the unicode class shouldn't implement the
> buffer interface at all? sure looks like the best way
> to avoid trivial mistakes (the current behaviour of
> fp.write(unicodeobj) is even more serious than the
> marshal glitch...)
>
> or maybe the buffer design needs an overhaul?
I think most places that should use the charbuffer interface actually
use the readbuffer interface. This is what should be fixed.
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4