A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140804/7cbaf6ea/attachment-0001.html below:

<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Antoine Pitrou <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:antoine@python.org" target="_blank">antoine@python.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="">I disagree. Unlike "nullable", "allow_none" does not tell me what<br>

happens on the C side when I pass in None. Â If the receiving type is<br>


PyObject*, either NULL or Py_None is a valid choice.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
But here the receiving type can be an int.</blockquote></div><br>We cannot "allow None" when the receiving type is C int. Â In this case, we need a way to implement "nullable int" type in C. Â We can use int * or a pair of int and _Bool or anything else. Â Whatever the implementation, the concept that is implemented is "nullable int." Â The advantage of using the term "nullable" is that it is language and implementation neutral.</div>
</div>

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