Thomas Wouters wrote:
Why even have separate tp_as_sequence and tp_as_mapping anymore? That
particular distinction never existed for Python types, so why should it
exist for C types at all? I forget if there was ever a real point to it,
I imagine the original motivation was to provide a fast
On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 18:20:22 -0800
Thomas Wouters wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how the ABCs, which are abstract declarations of semantics,
> tie into this specific implementation detail. ABCs work just as well for
> Python types as for C types, and Python types don't have this distinction.
> The distin
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Thomas Wouters wrote:
> (Let's not forget about tp_as_sequence.sq_concat, tp_as_number.nb_add,
> tp_as_sequence.sq_repeat and tp_as_number.nb_mul either.)
Indeed, let's not forget about those, which are a compatibility
problem in and of themselves: http://bugs.pyt
>> Thomas Wouters, 03.03.2012 21:59:
>> > Why even have separate tp_as_sequence and tp_as_mapping anymore? That
>> > particular distinction never existed for Python types, so why should it
>> > exist for C types at all? I forget if there was ever a real point to it,
>> > but all it seems to do now
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 13:12, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Thomas Wouters, 03.03.2012 21:59:
> > Why even have separate tp_as_sequence and tp_as_mapping anymore? That
> > particular distinction never existed for Python types, so why should it
> > exist for C types at all? I forget if there was ever a r
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 13:02, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 12:59:13 -0800
> Thomas Wouters wrote:
> >
> > Why even have separate tp_as_sequence and tp_as_mapping anymore? That
> > particular distinction never existed for Python types, so why should it
> > exist for C types at all?
Thomas Wouters, 03.03.2012 21:59:
> Why even have separate tp_as_sequence and tp_as_mapping anymore? That
> particular distinction never existed for Python types, so why should it
> exist for C types at all? I forget if there was ever a real point to it,
> but all it seems to do now is create confu
On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 12:59:13 -0800
Thomas Wouters wrote:
>
> Why even have separate tp_as_sequence and tp_as_mapping anymore? That
> particular distinction never existed for Python types, so why should it
> exist for C types at all? I forget if there was ever a real point to it,
> but all it seems
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 10:18, Eli Bendersky wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 19:58, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 4:20 AM, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
> >>> I'd expect slice subscripts to be part of the sequence interface, and
> >>> yet they are not. In fact, they are part of th
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 19:58, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 4:20 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>> I'd expect slice subscripts to be part of the sequence interface, and
>>> yet they are not. In fact, they are part of the mapping interface. For
>>> example, the list object has its s
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 4:20 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> I'd expect slice subscripts to be part of the sequence interface, and
>> yet they are not. In fact, they are part of the mapping interface. For
>> example, the list object has its slice get/set methods assigned to a
>> PyMappingMethods struc
Le samedi 03 mars 2012 à 14:41 +0200, Eli Bendersky a écrit :
> >> I'd expect slice subscripts to be part of the sequence interface, and
> >> yet they are not. In fact, they are part of the mapping interface. For
> >> example, the list object has its slice get/set methods assigned to a
> >> PyMappi
>> I'd expect slice subscripts to be part of the sequence interface, and
>> yet they are not. In fact, they are part of the mapping interface. For
>> example, the list object has its slice get/set methods assigned to a
>> PyMappingMethods struct. So does a bytes object, and pretty much every
>> oth
Hi,
> I'd expect slice subscripts to be part of the sequence interface, and
> yet they are not. In fact, they are part of the mapping interface. For
> example, the list object has its slice get/set methods assigned to a
> PyMappingMethods struct. So does a bytes object, and pretty much every
> ot
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 11:24, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Eli Bendersky, 03.03.2012 09:36:
>> I find a strange discrepancy in Python with regards to slice
>> subscripting of objects, at the C API level. I mean things like
>> obj[start:end:step].
>>
>> I'd expect slice subscripts to be part of the seque
Eli Bendersky, 03.03.2012 09:36:
> I find a strange discrepancy in Python with regards to slice
> subscripting of objects, at the C API level. I mean things like
> obj[start:end:step].
>
> I'd expect slice subscripts to be part of the sequence interface, and
> yet they are not. In fact, they are p
> This doesn't align well with the documentation, in at least two places.
>
Another place is in http://docs.python.org/dev/reference/datamodel.html:
"
object.__getitem__(self, key)
Called to implement evaluation of self[key]. For sequence types,
the accepted keys should be integers and slic
17 matches
Mail list logo
