Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>>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.
Tismer:
>>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).
There is one second thought about this, but I'm not sure
whether it is allowed to do so:
Assuming that I *would* simply do add a field to PyMethodDef,
and take care that all types coming from foreign binaries
don't have that special type bit set, could I not simply create
a new method table and replace it for that external type
by just changing its method table pointer?
I think traversing method tables is always an action that
the core dll does. Or do I have to fear that an extension
does special things to method tables at runtime?
If that approach is trustworthy, I also could drop
the request for these 8 bits.
thanks - chris
--
Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer@tismer.com>
Mission Impossible 5oftware : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9a : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14109 Berlin : PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
work +49 30 89 09 53 34 home +49 30 802 86 56 pager +49 173 24 18 776
PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.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