[Python-Dev] PEP 393 Summer of Code Project

[Nick Coghlan]

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:17 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
>> Has this been considered before? Was there a reason to decide against it?
>
> I think we simply didn't consider it. An early version of the PEP used
> the lower bits for the pointer to encode the kind, in which case it even
> stopped being a pointer. Modules are not expected to access this
> pointer except through the macros, so it may not matter that much.
>
> OTOH, it's certainly not too late to change it.

It would make the macro implementations a bit clearer, so +1 for the
union approach from me.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia