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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2000-July/005657.html below:

[Python-Dev] Collection of typedefs for integral types

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Collection of typedefs for integral types
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Collection of typedefs for integral types
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, Jul 06, 2000 at 05:37:56PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
>...
> My position remains the same:  adopt the C9X names for as many of the new
> integral synonyms as we *need*, but stick "Py_" in front of them.

Why should we insert the Py_ prefix? We can just use autoconf to test for
the types. If present, then we use them. If not, then we define our own
replacements.

I see no particular reason to complicate it with Py_.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Collection of typedefs for integral types
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Collection of typedefs for integral types
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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