[Guido] > Of course, we'd still have several sets of macros, because of the need > to be able to say different things: allocate and initialize an object, > initialize an object, deinitialize an object and free its memory, > deinitialize an object without freeing its memory; and the GC > variations of all these; and macros that take type arguments used for > convenient casting. (Initializing and deinitializing an object are > things like setting the refcount to 1 and initializing the type > pointer, but various debugging modes add functionalities like counting > allocations and linking all objects together in a doubly-linked list.) Yup! Count 'em all up, and I bet there are easily 100 function and macro names mixed into this by now. > ... > Assuming we're ready to start over, I'd like to see a minimal proposal > so we can discuss something concrete. So would I. I was up writing about this 'til 6 in the morning because there's no time for it here. I should be doing (many) other things now too instead, especially Zope things. I expect that either Neal or Vladimir could come up with a better compromise position than I could, if they had time to work on it. out-of-gas-ly y'rs - tim
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