Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes: > So perhaps the refcnt should have been a long in the first place. A > similar argument may hold for the length of e.g. strings and lists: > one could wish to have a list of more than 2 billion elements, or a > string containing more than 2 gigabytes (that much RAM is easily found > on the larger 64-bit servers, I believe). > > Opinions? I agree with that position, and Tim's, that those fields should widen to 64 bits on a 64-bit system. I disagree that size_t is suitable for ob_size, since some types put negative values into ob_size. The signed version of that, ssize_t, is not universally available, so we'd need to add Py_ssize_t. Regards, Martin
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