[Python-Dev] Can we use "designated initializer" widely in core modules?
Erik
python at lucidity.plus.com
Tue Jan 17 19:00:05 EST 2017
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Tue Jan 17 19:00:05 EST 2017
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Can we use "designated initializer" widely in core modules?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Can we use "designated initializer" widely in core modules?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 17/01/17 06:32, INADA Naoki wrote: > With designated initializer, it becomes: > > 0, /* tp_free */ > + .tp_fastcall = (fastternaryfunc)attrgetter_call, > }; > > It's readable, and easy to review. FWIW, I dislike mixing the two forms (because it still prevents the structure layout changing - or introduces bugs if it does - though I guess in Python's case that's not likely to happen). PEP 7 doesn't mention anything about this and I doubt a wholesale conversion effort to the C99 syntax would be desirable, but perhaps a recommendation that if a new initializer is being added then the whole expression should be changed to the C99 syntax is reasonable. Regards, E.
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Can we use "designated initializer" widely in core modules?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Can we use "designated initializer" widely in core modules?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list