RetroSearch Browse

Mon May 29 23:33:36 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-May/065381.html

On 5/29/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
>
> Neal Norwitz wrote:
> > minus comments, etc  yields several questions about whether some
> > values should use Py_ssize_t rather than C longs.  In particular:
>
> > * ints:  Include/intobject.h:    long ob_ival;
>
> As Tim says, this is way out of scope for 2.5. Guido said it is ok
> to change this to 64-bit ints in 2.6, but I expect some embedded
> system developers will start screaming when they hear that: 64-bit
> arithmetic is expensive on a 32-bit machine.

Well, those systems shouldn't have a 64-bit Py_ssize_t anyway, should they?

-- 
Thomas Wouters <thomas at python.org>

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me
spread!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060529/93fa1e3f/attachment.htm 

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-May/065381.html below:

[Python-Dev] ssize_t question: longs in header files