> > > Could also just have one acquire function that indicates whether it > > > is read-write or read-only via a return parameter. > > > > That loses the (weak) symmetry with the existing API. > > There's nothing a client expecting a read/write pointer could > do with a read only pointer IMO. So we agree that it's a bad idea to have one function. :-) > > > Is write-only ever useful? > > > > No, write implies read. > > Should it be named getfixedreadwritebuffer then? No, the existing API also uses getwritebuffer implying read/write. --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