[Scott Gilbert] > ... > I should have been more clear. I was referring specifically to working > with pointers: > > datum = *(pointer + offset); > or: > datum = pointer[offset]; Na, my fault -- I fit in the email between other things, and hadn't read the whole thread up to that point. It was clear enough in context. > Just so there is no confusion, you aren't suggesting that the bytes PEP > should provide a mechanism to support chunks of memory larger than 4 Gigs > on 32 bit platforms right? It depends on how insane you are. It sure as heck doesn't *sound* like this is the bytes object's problem to solve, but then if people want their data sorted they shouldn't let it get out of order to begin with either <wink>. > I think the bytes object could be a part of the solution to that problem, > at least I know how I would do that under Win32, but I'd rather not kluge > up the interface to the bytes object to support it directly. I agree.
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