RetroSearch Browse

Sat Oct 18 22:30:27 EDT 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039000.html

Guido van Rossum wrote:

>>Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> writes:
>>
>>
>>>Maybe PyBool_FromLong() itself could make this unneeded by adding
>>>something like
>>>
>>>    if (ok < 0 && PyErr_Occurred())
>>>        return NULL;
>>>
>>>to its start?
> 
> 
> [MvL]
> 
>>That would an incompatible change. I would expect PyBool_FromLong(i)
>>do the same thing as bool(i).
> 
> 
> Well, it still does, *except* if you have a pending exception.  IMO
> what happens when you make a Python API call while an exception is
> pending is pretty underspecified, so it's doubtful whether this
> incompatibility matters.
> 
> 
>>>Maybe a pair of macros Py_return_True and Py_return_False would make
>>>sense?
>>
>>You should, of course, add Py_return_None to it, as well.
>>
>>Then you will find that some contributor goes on a crusade to use
>>these throughout very quickly :-)
> 
> 
> There's the minor issue of how to spell it (Mark Hammond may have a
> different suggestion) but that certain contributor has my approval
> once we get the spelling agreed upon.
> 

So I just grepped the source and checked the patch manager and don't see 
any resolution on this.  I know there was no objections from anyone to 
do this beyond just coming up with an agreed spelling.

So Py_return_None or Py_RETURN_NONE ?  I am with Mark in liking the 
all-caps for macros, but I can easily live with the first suggestion as 
well.

-Brett

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039000.html below:

[Python-Dev] How to spell Py_return_None and friends (was: RE: [Python-checkins] python/dist/src/Objects typeobject.c, 2.244, 2.245)