> Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes: > > > But in Mark's case (and in many other cases) there will be no problem > > in the future -- in Python 2.4, his C code will happily accept the > > positive Python longs that 0x80000000 and others will be then. > > Can you please explain how this will happen? If you do > > int x; > PyArg_ParseTuple(args,"i",&x); > > and args is (0x80000000,), what will be the value of x? > > > BTW, this reminds me that I've long promised a set of new format codes > > for PyArg_ParseTuple() to specify taking the lower N bits (for N in > > 8, 16, 32, 64) and throwing the rest away, without range checks. > > Wouldn't Mark have to use these format codes? That's what I meant. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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