Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Carl Banks wrote:
>> Ok, I've thought quite a bit about this, and I have an idea that I
>> think will be ok with you, and I'll be able to drop my main
>> objection. It's not a big change, either. The key is to explicitly
>&g
Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Carl Banks wrote:
>> My recommendation is, any flag should turn on some circle in the Venn
>> diagram (it could be a circle I didn't draw--shaped arrays, for
>> example--but it should be *some* circle).
> I don't think your Venn
Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Carl Banks wrote:
>>
>>
>> Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> > Py_BUF_READONLY
>> >The returned buffer must be readonly and the underlying object
>> should make
>> >its memory readonly if that is possible.
>&
Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Py_BUF_READONLY
>The returned buffer must be readonly and the underlying object
should make
>its memory readonly if that is possible.
I don't like the "if possible" thing. If it makes no guarantees, it
pretty much useless over Py_BUF_SIMPLE.
> Py_BUF_FORM
n
question.
Then submit it as a real PEP. I believe this idea has run its course as
PEP XXX and needs a real number. (I was intending to start making
patches for the Py3K library modules as soon as that happened.)
Carl Banks
Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> Here is my "final"
Carl Banks wrote:
> Here's a concrete example of where it would be useful: consider a
> ByteBufferSlice object. Basically, the object represents a
> shared-memory slice of a 1-D array of bytes (for example, Python 3000
> bytes object, or an mmap object).
>
> Now,
Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Carl Banks wrote:
>> Travis E. Oliphant wrote:
>>> I think we are getting closer. What do you think about Greg's idea
>>> of basically making the provider the bufferinfo structure and having
>>> the exporter handle copyin
of the new buffer), but can be a positive
number if the following dimension has been sliced, and thus the 0th
entry in that dimension would not be at the beginning of the new
buffer.
Other than that, looks good. :)
Carl Banks
___
Python-Dev
Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Carl Banks wrote:
>
>> Tr
>> ITSM that we are using the word "view" very differently. Consider
>> this example:
>>
>> A = zeros((100,100))
>> B = A.transpose()
>
>
> You are thinking of NumPy's particu
Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Carl Banks wrote:
>> We're done. Return pointer.
>
> Thank you for this detailed example. I will have to parse it in more
> depth but I think I can see what you are suggesting.
>
>> First, I'm not sure why getbuffer needs to return
(cc'ing back to Python-dev; the original reply was intended for it by I
had an email malfunction.)
Travis Oliphant wrote:
>Carl Banks wrote:
>> 3. Allow getbuffer to return an array of "derefence offsets", one for
>> each dimension. For a given dimension i, if
11 matches
Mail list logo
