Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes:
> > As a last remark (although this is too long already),
> > I'd also like to extend the __slots__ syntax by the
> > ability to express "embedded types", like the types
> > supported by array. This again saves a lot of memory
> > when you know your attribute is always some simple type,
> > which need not become an object.
>
> Can you suggest a concrete syntax to do this? Maybe setting __slots__
> to a dictionary mapping names to type specifiers would do it -- and it
> would even be backwards compatible: currently, if __slots__ is a dict,
> its keys are used as slot names and its values are ignored, by virtue
> of the way the type constructor iterates over __slots__.
May I suggest to use an ordered sequence (of pairs) instead of a dict
for __slots__. Then you also can completely control the layout that
C code sees and construct C compatible structures or other data types
from pure Python code.
<plug>
Here's how ctypes does it: It's named _fields_ instead of __slots__,
and typically you write something like this
class Point(Structure):
_fields_ = [("x", "i"),
("y", "i")]
which defines a Python objects having x and y instance vars, which
must be integers.
ctypes extends this so that instead of the (struct module compatible)
format specified "i", also Python objects are allowed which describe
a C data type.
Thomas
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