On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 11:32:44AM +0200, Vladimir Marangozov wrote: > Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > > > jeremy wrote: > > > > > Tuple, List, String, and Dict have a PyXXX_Size method. The abstract > > > object interface uses PySequence_Length. This is inconsistent and > > > hard to remember. Can we add PySequence_Size and mark Length as > > > deprecated? > > > > don't forget PyObject_Length and PyMapping_Length... > > Why deprecate? There's nothing wrong with these names. > However, for conveniency, it would make sense to have > PyXXX_Size macros, synonyms for the PyXXX_Length functions. Because having both names is even worse than having inconsistent names. The question will always arise "what is the difference? why should I use one over the other?" You can tell people they are the same until you're blue in the face -- the question will still come up. Maybe after a while, the question won't come up any more. But then you have to answer, "okay. so they're exactly the same. why have two of them, then?" :-) > Or vice versa. Have _Length macros, synonyms for _Size functions. > However, this is not backwards (binary) compatible, which I > believe is harmless for a new release, but the recent Windows > DLL thread reminds that bin compatibility accross versions > is somewhat important. Binary compatibility in Open Source software is a pipe dream. There is absolutely no sense in trying to worry about it, and even more sense to explicitly bail out with "that doesn't work." Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
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