> > It's better to reserve bits explicitly. Can you submit a patch to SF > > that makes reservations of the bits you need? All they need is a > > definition of a symbol and a comment explaining what it is for; > > "reserved for Stackless" is fine. > > Ok, what I'm asking for is: > "please reserve one bit for me in tp->flags" (31 preferred) and > "please reserve 8 bits for me in ml->flags" (24-31 preferred). > The latter will also not degrade performance, since > these bits shalt simply not be used, but if STACKLESS isn't > defined, there is no need to mask these bits off. > I also will name these fields in a way that makes it obvious > for everybody that they better should not touch these. > > Iff you agree, I'm going to submit my patch now, and my thanks > will follow you for the rest of the subset of our lives. :) +1 --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