Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com> writes: > Yes, but due to the way the parser works everything works fine for > me. In the constant definition file it says "foo = 0xff000000". The > parser turns this into a negative integer. Fine with me, the bits > are the same, and PyArg_Parse doesn't complain. Please notice that this will stop working some day: 0xff000000 will be a positive number, and the "i" parser will raise an OverflowError. By that time, you might be using the "k" parser, which will accept 0xff000000 both as a negative and a positive number, and fill the int with 0xff000000. Before that happens, you might want to anticipate that problem, and propose an implementation that means minimum changes for you - it then will likely mean minimum changes for everybody else, as well. Perhaps "k" isn't such a good solution, perhaps "I" is better, or perhaps "i" should weaken its range checking, and emit a deprecationwarning when an unsigned number is passed. Regards, Martin
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