Re: Support for Indexing and Iteration Safety

"David Abrahams" <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:u65nv6j6h.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      1. Unlike most of the other operators, which can be wrapped using
>         "self op other", there's no easy way to wrap the indexing
>         operator.  You end up having to write your own __getitem__
>         and __setitem__ functions.

I don't see any _general_ way to automate that, however it might be worth
for STL containers.
Probably simplistic approach will do; any advanced person can do that
himself and starters will benefit right out of the box.

inline void IndexError()
  { PyErr_SetString(PyExc_IndexError,"Index too large");
throw_error_already_set(); }

template<class T>
struct std_item
{
  typedef typename T::value_type Value;

  static Value const& get(T& x, int n) {
    if( n<0 ) n+=x.size();
    if( n<x.size() && n>=0 ) return x[n];
    IndexError(); }

  static void set(T& x, int n, const Value& val) {
    if( n<0 ) n+=x.size();
    if( n<x.size() && n>=0 ) x[n]=val;
    else IndexError(); }

  static void del(T& x, int n) {
    if( n<0 ) n+=x.size();
    if( n<x.size() && n>=0 ) x.erase(&x[n]);
    else IndexError(); }
};

>      2. You also have to implement the code which raises an exception
>         if the index is out of range or the key is not found (in case
>         you're implementing a mapping).  If you forget, your extension
>         class is prone to crashes and accessing invalid data.

Ditto.

>      3. Even if you get that right, you may still be prone to crashes.
>         Suppose you're wrapping a std::vector<SomeBigObject>.  If you
>         want to support syntax like:

Let's return to basics. What is foo[10]? In C++ it's a memory chunk, in
Python it's an object.
To overcome that difference I propose to introduce differenciation in
wrapping, a la it is in Python: there are tuples and lists; mutable and
immutable. So let user decide what he wants out of foo[10] - mutable object
(a copy), or readonly - an inplace reference.
Again please don't argue about general ineffiency, IMHO better safe than
sorry ..egh crash.
I take for granted that some _simple_ enought way to override that default
behaviour with custom is provided.

>      4. Similar problem with exposed iterators:

Same.

> These problems are not vector-specific.  I have some ideas about
> addressing them but I'm not sure how far to go, and first I want to
> know how many people care.

My 0.02. Hope I made my point clear.

Mike Rovner