[Python-Dev] State of PEP-3118 (memoryview part) (original) (raw)

Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu
Thu Mar 1 02:10:12 CET 2012

On 2/29/2012 2:34 PM, Stefan Krah wrote:

Greg Ewing<greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:

Options 2) and 3) would ideally entail one backwards incompatible bugfix: In 2.7 and 3.2 assignment to a memoryview with format 'B' rejects integers but accepts byte objects, but according to the struct syntax mandated by the PEP it should be the other way round.

Maybe a compromise could be made to accept both in the backport? That would avoid breaking old code while allowing code that does the right thing to work.

This almost sounds like a feature addition.

This could definitely be done. But backporting is beginning to look unlikely, since we currently have three +1 for "too complex to backport".

I'm not strongly in favor of backporting myself. The main reason for me would be to prevent having additional 2->3 or 3->2 porting obstacles. Stefan Krah

-- Terry Jan Reedy

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list