[Python-Dev] Extended buffer PEP

Travis Oliphant oliphant.travis at ieee.org
Sun Apr 8 19:17:12 CEST 2007

Carl Banks wrote:
> Only one concern:
> >     typedef int (*getbufferproc)(PyObject *obj, struct bufferinfo 
> *view)
> I'd like to see it accept a flags argument over what kind of buffer 
> it's allowed to return.  I'd rather not burden the user to check all 
> the entries in bufferinfo to make sure it doesn't get something 
> unexpected.
Yes, I agree. We had something like that at one point. 
> I imagine most uses of buffer protocol would be for direct, 
> one-dimensional arrays of bytes with no striding.  It's not clear 
> whether read-only or read-write should be the least common 
> denominator, so require at least one of these flags:
> Then allow any of these flags to allow more complex access:
> Py_BUF_MULTIDIM - allows strided and multidimensional arrays
> Py_BUF_INDIRECT - allows indirect buffers (implies Py_BUF_MULTIDIM)
> An object is allowed to return a simpler array than requested, but not 
> more complex.  If you allow indirect buffers, you might still get a 
> one-dimensional array of bytes.
> Other than that, I would add a note about the other things considered 
> and rejected (the old prototype for getbufferproc, the delegated 
> buffer object).  List whether to backport the buffer protocol to 2.6 
> as an open question.

Thanks for the suggestions.
> Then submit it as a real PEP.  I believe this idea has run its course 
> as PEP XXX and needs a real number.  

How does one do that.   Who assigns the number?  I thought I "had" 
submitted it as a real PEP.


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list