RetroSearch Browse

Wed Dec 7 09:03:42 CET 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-December/058488.html

[Skip]
> I then proposed the
> even wackier idea to simply allow all currently unsupported iterables
> (sets
> and arrays seem the most obvious candidates to me) to be marshalled as
> lists

Doesn't the appropriate conversion depend on the contract between the
sender and receiver (i.e. an array of type 'c' may either be converted
as list(arr) or arr.tostring() depending on the app)?  Is the goal to
save writing explicit conversions by presuming that most iterables
aspire to be lists for transport purposes?

Raymond

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-December/058488.html below:

[Python-Dev] Broader iterable support for xmlrpclib