[Python-3000] PEP 3123: Making PyObject_HEAD conform to standard C (Was: Dropping PyObject_HEAD) (original) (raw)
Brett Cannon brett at python.org
Sun Apr 29 21:56:58 CEST 2007
- Previous message: [Python-3000] PEP 3123: Making PyObject_HEAD conform to standard C (Was: Dropping PyObject_HEAD)
- Next message: [Python-3000] Draft PEP: Dropping PyObject_HEAD
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 4/29/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Are we going to have a preference over PyObjectHEAD or defining the > struct field directly?
That is an open issue. PyObjectHEAD clearly is more backwards-compatible. However (besides its current non-C-conformance), I never liked it, because of the missing semicolon (I thought it confuses Emacs, but can't reproduce the problem anymore, though - perhaps it did confuse Emacs in the past?) So I personally would phase it out for style reasons, but others may think differently; if I hear opinions in either direction, I'm happy to code them into the PEP.
I say phase out the macro.
-Brett
- Previous message: [Python-3000] PEP 3123: Making PyObject_HEAD conform to standard C (Was: Dropping PyObject_HEAD)
- Next message: [Python-3000] Draft PEP: Dropping PyObject_HEAD
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]