[Python-3000] int-long unification (original) (raw)

Bob Ippolito bob at redivi.com
Sun Aug 20 01:57:47 CEST 2006

On 8/19/06, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:

On 8/19/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote: > Martin, > > I've thought about it more, and I think it's fine to use a single > type. It will surely simplify many things, and that alone might help > us win back some of the inefficiency this introduces. And it is best > for Python-level users.

Woohoo! I totally support this idea (along with anything else that comes up to simplify the C API; I almost feel like we need a dumbed-down API along with the full-powered API behind it). I also support Martin doing the work =) (but that's mostly because I know he is in a good position to do it well).

The easiest thing we could do to simplify extension writing would be to supply a script that generates extension source and a setup.py from a generic template. The template would demonstrate the current best practices for defining a function, a constant, an Exception subclass, and a class that wraps a C struct with a method or two.

-bob

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list