[Thomas Heller Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 03:41:42PM +0100]
holger krekel <hpk@trillke.net> writes:
Anyway, I would try very hard to express all the builtins in python. And i see Thomas Heller's ctypes approach as a way to make this possible.
So do I ;-) ;-), although I'm have no idea where to begin. Construct a new Python type by assembling the type structure completely as a ctypes type?
Hmm, that's one of my black areas in current CPython: the type system. I admit it's a rather large one :-) But wouldn't using a ctypes represenation of Python types only be neccessary when interfacing with CPython C stuff? IMV the 'chr' function could be implemented at 'interpreter level' and have representation-optimized access methods. So if a PyString had a ctype as its 'array' (is that possible today?) then effectively an assembler intruction fetching one byte and using that as a representation for a PyInt object might do it. I am trying to use the terms from previous discussions. But unless i coded some of that myself i am sure that i am not completly making sense ....
Here are some news on ctypes:
Development has has moved to SF: http://sourceforge.net/projects/ctypes.
Thomas, can you imagine the forthcoming pypy-repository and your ctypes-repo to merge at some point? CTypes would of course still have its own directory and could be separately tagged etc. Here, I am already thinking about how we can actually manage our upcoming coding at the Sprint. I think that having "everything neccessary" in one repo would be quite convenient. regards, holger