[Python-Dev] Can we use "designated initializer" widely in core modules?
Ronald Oussoren
ronaldoussoren at mac.com
Wed Jan 18 05:48:00 EST 2017
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Wed Jan 18 05:48:00 EST 2017
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Can we use "designated initializer" widely in core modules?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] [RELEASED] Python 3.4.6 and Python 3.5.3 are now available
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> On 18 Jan 2017, at 02:16, Victor Stinner <victor.stinner at gmail.com> wrote: > > 2017-01-18 1:59 GMT+01:00 INADA Naoki <songofacandy at gmail.com>: >> I think mixing two forms is OK only if new form is used only at bottom. >> (like keyword arguments are allowed after all positional arguments in >> Python function calling) >> >> Complete rewriting makes diff huge. And there is PyVarObject_HEAD_INIT already. > > I'm in favor of replacing all long list of fields with the /* tp_xxx > */ comments to use designated initializers. It would allow to remove a > lot of "0, /* tp_xxx */" lines and make the code much more > readable! It should help to prevent bugs when the code is modified. I agree. I’ve done this in my own projects and that made the code a lot easier to read. Ronald
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Can we use "designated initializer" widely in core modules?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] [RELEASED] Python 3.4.6 and Python 3.5.3 are now available
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list