[Python-Dev] Re: Re: Int FutureWarnings and other 2.4 TODOs

Michael Hudson mwh at python.net
Thu Dec 4 10:45:11 EST 2003

"Phillip J. Eby" <pje at telecommunity.com> writes:

> At 09:36 AM 12/4/03 -0500, Andrew Koenig wrote:
>>So here's the strategy:  If the low-order bit of an integer is *off*, it's
>>really a pointer to the rest of the implementation.  If the low-order bit is
>>*on*, then it represents an integral value that can be obtained by doing a
>>one-bit arithmetic right shift.
>>Yes, it's sleazy.  But I imagine it would be much faster than using
> I imagine it wouldn't, because it'd add an extra test to not only
> every Py_INCREF and Py_DECREF, but every PyObject_something call.

It wouldn't have to be that bad if you put the pointer/int thingy in
the ob_ival slot.


  The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste.
              -- Steve Jobs, (From _Triumph of the Nerds_ PBS special)
                                and quoted by Aahz on comp.lang.python

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list