On Wednesday 05 August 2009 20:12:05 Paul Rubin wrote: > "Martin P. Hellwig" <martin.hell...@dcuktec.org> writes: > > what I usually do is read the packet in binary mode, convert the > > output to a concatenated 'binary string'(i.e. '0101011000110') and > > Something wrong with reading the data words as an integer and using > old fashioned shifts and masks to get at the bit fields?
There is nothing wrong with that, and in the final analysis, it is what is used - however, I can sympathize with the OP, as it is much nicer to just call a named thing than to juggle a bunch of hard coded shifts and masks. I think the real point here is sort of meta programming - what is needed is a way to describe and name the elements of the structure so that useful python objects are created. The code I posted for bits does that, and I use it all the time - it is almost as good as being back in 8031 assembler with direct named bit access. - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
