RetroSearch Browse

Fri Feb 10 19:07:45 CET 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/060705.html

On 2/10/06, Tim Peters <tim.peters at gmail.com> wrote:
> [Jeremy]
> >> I added some const to several API functions that take char* but
> >> typically called by passing string literals.  In C++, a string literal
> >> is a const char* so you need to add a const_cast<> to every call site,
> >> which is incredibly cumbersome.  After some discussion on python-dev,
> >> I made changes to a small set of API functions and chased the
> >> const-ness the rest of the way, as you would expect.  There was
> >> nothing random about the places const was added.
>
> [Guido]
> > I still don't understand *why* this was done,
>
> Primarily to make life easier for C++ programmers using Python's C
> API.  But didn't Jeremy just say that?

I didn't connect the dots.

> Some people (including me) have been adding const to char* API
> arguments for years, but in much slower motion, and at least I did it
> only when someone complained about a specific function.
>
> > nor how the set of functions was chosen if not randomly.
>
>     [Jeremy]
>     I added some const to several API functions that take char* but
>     typically called by passing string literals.
>
> If he had _stuck_ to that, we wouldn't be having this discussion :-)
> (that is, nobody passes string literals to
> PyArg_ParseTupleAndKeywords's kws argument).

Is it too late to revert this one?

Is there another way to make C++ programmers happy (e.g. my having a
macro that expands to const when compiled with C++ but vanishes when
compiled with C?)

--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/060705.html below:

[Python-Dev] Baffled by PyArg_ParseTupleAndKeywords modification