On, Tue Apr 15, 2008, Brian Fisher wrote: > My bad, I always assumed implementing the buffer interface would make > the BufferProxy object give python code the ability to modify the > contents of the surface just like through array.array... > > I dislike adding numpy/numeric as a dependency, and previously I sped > some stuff up by making an array from a string, modifying the array, > then making a new surface from the modified array as a string vs. > getting and setting pixels, so I would love it if I could just do > stuff like: > --- > surface = Surface((1,1), 32) > surface_contents = surface.get_buffer() > surface_contents[3] = 0 > --- > or whatever... > > does that seem like something that would be sensible to add to the > buffer proxy? is there a C python interface thing that makes providing > that kind of access real easy? That's what the PixelArray is for. Due to the alignment, pitch, etc. of the surface data, you cannot easily operate directly on the buffer. BufferProxy is just a simple interface to the surface pixels so other systems like e.g. numpy can (ab)use surfaces pixels easily without the need to write C code for them. Regards Marcus
Attachment:
pgpXWq0LFtCnX.pgp
Description: PGP signature