Efficient copies of bytes #342
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
this looks interesting -- but will take more time than I have avail right now. also can you fix the build after I update with other PRs? |
|
Sure, I'll fix the build now and rebase. |
NoamK-CR
force-pushed
the
issue-323/slice-bytes
branch
from
04a4ff9
to
036ed32
Compare
|
Thanks and sorry for the delay in merging! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This aims to solve both #323 and #328 by supplying efficient methods to copy Python
bytesinto Go[]byteslices and vice versa.One question I have is whether the
Slice_bytePython constructor should check if the first argument is of typebytes, and if so use the optimized method?