On Nov 2, 2004, at 12:41 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
When we have objects with finalizers, we have to run the finalizers in
order from most derived down the parent chain.
Maybe, but not necessarily. The case of loops means that we cannot
always do this cleanly (no "top" of the chain), and the fact
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 9:03 PM +0100 11/1/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>>We need more vtables.
>>
>>* INTVAL hash()
>>
>>To properly support Python, we need:
>>- a hash PMC that isn't restricted to STRING* keys
> Works for m
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
We need more vtables.
* INTVAL hash()
To properly support Python, we need:
- a hash PMC that isn't restricted to STRING* keys - low level hash code
has AFAIK already all the necessary stuff, or mostly. I don't know, how
much Python specific it really is, b
At 9:03 PM +0100 11/1/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
We need more vtables.
* INTVAL hash()
To properly support Python, we need:
- a hash PMC that isn't restricted to STRING* keys - low level hash
code has AFAIK already all the necessary stuff, or mostly. I don't
know, how much Python s
We need more vtables.
* INTVAL hash()
To properly support Python, we need:
- a hash PMC that isn't restricted to STRING* keys - low level hash code
has AFAIK already all the necessary stuff, or mostly. I don't know, how
much Python specific it really is, but Perl5's "hashing
