> Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes: > > > There's no excuse for that any more. The 'i' and 'l' format chars of > > PyArg_Parse* and PyInt_AsLong() both work for longs as well as for > > ints. Martin: > There is a change, of course: Passing 0xff<<24 to a function that uses > the "i" converter will produce an OverflowError, whereas it previously > would pass in the negative numbers. And unfortunately the same will happen for the "l" converter (PyInt_AsLong(<long>) does a signed range check. > For cases of "I want 32 bits in an int", you'll have to accept both > signed and unsigned 32 bits - something that is currently not > supported in ParseTuple. Oops. Darn. You're right. Sigh. That's painful. We have to add a new format code (or more) to accept signed 32-bit ints but also longs in range(32). This should be added in 2.3 so extensions can start using it now, and user code can start passing longs in range(2**32) now. I propose 'k' (for masK). We should backport this to 2.2.2 as well. Plus a variant on PyInt_AsLong() with the same semantics, maybe named PyInt_AsMask(). Any takers? --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4