Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > > Should I add these, Guido ? -- I'd rather stick with predefined > > macros than cook my own. > > > The AC_C_INLINE would be esp. interesting here: > > > I think this could be used a lot for those tiny function which > > just apply a type check and then return some object attribute > > value. > > umm. since inline isn't really part of ANSI C, that > means that you'll end up having possibly non-inlined > code in header files, right? > > (I use inline agressively inside modules, except for > really critical things that absolutely definitively must > be inlined -- look in PIL to see what I mean...) Hmm, it would probably cause code to go into header files -- not really good style but perhaps C++ has leveraged this a bit recently ;-) > > The AC_C_CONST frightens me a bit: the Unicode code uses "const" > > a lot to make sure compilers can do the right optimizations. Are > > there compilers out there which do not handle "const" correctly ? > > not sure about this; I just copied the list from PIL, and > should probably have left this one out. > > I've don't think I've ever used it, and afaik, 1.6 will no longer > support non-ANSI compilers anyway... Uff, glad you said that :-) BTW, has anyone tried to compile the Unicode stuff on Windows yet ? -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Business: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
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