A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-July/027028.html below:

[Python-Dev] pre-PEP: The Safe Buffer Interface

[Python-Dev] pre-PEP: The Safe Buffer Interface [Python-Dev] pre-PEP: The Safe Buffer InterfaceScott Gilbert xscottg@yahoo.com
Mon, 29 Jul 2002 09:54:19 -0700 (PDT)
--- Thomas Heller <thomas.heller@ion-tof.com> wrote:
> 
> > This restricts the set of objects that can be buffers to statically
> > sized objects. I'd prefer that dynamically resizable objects be able to
> > be buffers.
> > 
> 
> ..., but I understand Neil's requirements.
> 
> Can they be fulfilled by adding some kind of UnlockObject()
> call to the 'safe buffer interface', which should mean 'I won't
> use the pointer received by getsaferead/writebufferproc any more'?
> 

I assume this means any call to getsafereadpointer()/getsafewritepointer()
will increment the lock count.  So the UnlockObject() calls will be
mandatory.  Either that, or you'll have an explicit LockObject() call as
well.  What behavior should happen when a resise is attempted while the
lock count is positive?




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com



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