On 3/22/09 8:01 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> Now, the internals are very clear to me. What I don't understand
>> is where the three saved bytes should be.
>
> If you look at the various patches in
>
> http://bugs.python.org/issue576101
>
> then there is a three-byte saving in all versions from 1 to 6.
> Consequentially, the API was changed in those versions (but only
> starting from version 5, i.e. the first version created by Guido).
>
> For some reason, the saving was then removed from the patch that
> got actually committed (#7). I guess the comment just stayed.
Yes, funny, actually. At least, I don't find any comment why
the char was turned into an int, after all.
Are char pointers not on a word boundary problematic on some
platforms?
Or was it maybe to just keep the string layout on many
common platforms compatible, in order to save rebuilding
so many windows extension modules?
If the latter is true and the only reason, I vote for reclaiming
the three bytes. Maybe it saves a tree or two. Maybe it hurts
very little if done for Python 3000.
In any case, use the version that saves the most energy. :-)
not kidding - ciao -- chris
--
Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer at stackless.com>
tismerysoft GmbH : 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 30 802 86 56 mobile +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 30 80 90 57 05
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