J
Juraj Ivanèiæ
Is it possible to somehow 'steal' bytearray's buffer and make it a
read-only bytes? I failed to find a way to do this, and would like to
make sure.
My use case is, I would expect, fairly common. I read a certain
(potentially very large) amount of data from the network into a
pre-allocated bytearray. From that point on, this data is logically
read-only. To prevent making redundant copies, I wrap it in a
memoryview, and then slice and dice it. The problem with this memoryview
is that it, and its slices, are considered writable, and thus cannot be
hashed:
ValueError: cannot hash writable memoryview object
The only way (AFAICT) to make this work is to first create a bytes
object from bytearray, but this copies the data. I don't need this copy,
so I'd like to avoid it, because of both principle and performance reasons.
Is there any reason why bytearray isn't able to release/convert its
buffer to bytes? I see that it has a clear() method which... well...
clears it. The former would be much more useful.
I would also be content if there is some way of making memoryview
artificially read-only to avoid the above error.
Any help/thoughts/comments are highly appreciated.
read-only bytes? I failed to find a way to do this, and would like to
make sure.
My use case is, I would expect, fairly common. I read a certain
(potentially very large) amount of data from the network into a
pre-allocated bytearray. From that point on, this data is logically
read-only. To prevent making redundant copies, I wrap it in a
memoryview, and then slice and dice it. The problem with this memoryview
is that it, and its slices, are considered writable, and thus cannot be
hashed:
ValueError: cannot hash writable memoryview object
The only way (AFAICT) to make this work is to first create a bytes
object from bytearray, but this copies the data. I don't need this copy,
so I'd like to avoid it, because of both principle and performance reasons.
Is there any reason why bytearray isn't able to release/convert its
buffer to bytes? I see that it has a clear() method which... well...
clears it. The former would be much more useful.
I would also be content if there is some way of making memoryview
artificially read-only to avoid the above error.
Any help/thoughts/comments are highly appreciated.