Winter Madness - Passing Python objects as Strings

Hendrik van Rooyen mail at microcorp.co.za
Fri Jun 5 18:16:37 CEST 2009


"Nigel Rantor" <wi.. at wiggly.org> wrote:

> Well, why not have a look at Gabriel's response.

I have, and have responded at some length, further
explaining what I am doing, and why.
 
> That seems like a much more portable way of doing it if nothing else.

There is nothing portable in what I am doing - it is aimed at the eBox,
as the i/o stuff is specific to the Vortex processor.  Even without the
can and uncan, if you were to try to run it on any other machine, 
it would segfault because of the underlying C routines called via ctypes
to access the non standard parallel port.

> I'm not trolling, you just seem to be excited about something that
> sounds like a fundamentally bad idea.

Glad to hear it, and I am aware of the dangers, but I am aiming at
a very specific speed objective, and I really cannot think of a way
that achieves the result in fewer machine cycles than this weird
way of passing an object, in a case such as mine. (barring of course
writing the whole thing in C, which would never get the job done
in time)

- Hendrik





More information about the Python-list mailing list