"Fred L. Drake, Jr." wrote: > > M.-A. Lemburg writes: > > You have a point there... even though it breaks the notion > > of prepending all parameters with an '&' (ok, except the > > I've never heard of this notion; I hope I didn't just miss it in the > docs! If you scan the parameters list in getargs.c you'll come to this conclusion and thus my notion: I've been programming like this for years now :-) > The O& also doesn't require a & in front of the name of the > conversion function, you just pass the right value. So there are at > least two cases where you *typically* don't use a &. (Other cases in > the 1.5.2 API are probably just plain weird if they don't!) > Changing it to avoid the extra machinery is the Right Thing; you get > to feel good today. ;) Ok, feeling good now ;-) -- 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