New submission from Fil Mackay: I've been looking at adding 128-bit support to the struct module. Currently only named integer types are supported, which vary in implementation. These include:
short int long long long Depending on the platform, none may translate to 128-bit integer (the case with all platforms today?). One approach would be to make a new type that relates specifically to 128-bit integer, side-stepping the naming approaches to integer in C. The other, would be to make new types for all integer sizes that relate to specific sizes, instead of relying on C namings. Much bigger implications? I propose creating new types: "o": __int128_t "O": __uint128_t "t": __int256_t (why not?) "T": __uint256_t "v": __int512_t (what, too far?) "V": __int512_t What implications are there here in killing the connection between a C named type and a specific size? ---------- components: ctypes messages: 205344 nosy: fil priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Add 128-bit integer support to struct type: enhancement versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.4, Python 3.5 _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue19904> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
