22 Mar
2009
22 Mar
'09
7:56 p.m.
Christian Tismer <tismer <at> stackless.com> writes:
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.
Well, if you want to make the str type in py3k smaller, there is a more massive saving to be done by making it a PyVarObject, rather than allocating the storage separately. A patch has existed for that for a long time now, it probably needs updating if anyone is interested: http://bugs.python.org/issue1943