RetroSearch Browse

Sat Jan 17 17:22:22 CET 2009 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-January/085121.html

On 1/17/09, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> Mark Dickinson <dickinsm <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> Benjamin wondered aloud about deprecating PyNumber_Long
>> in the issue 4910 discussion;  I suggested deprecating
>> PyNumber_Int instead, but on reflection I think Benjamin's right:
>> it seems neater to keep the PyNumber_Int <-> int() <-> nb_int
>> naming connections than the PyNumber_Long <-> PyLong
>> ones.
>
> The C API uses the Long (rather than Int) wording, so it would be rather
> strange
> to have an outlier in PyNumber_Int. We should keep PyNumber_Long instead.

I agree with Antoine here. Using nb_int instead of nb_long is rather
unfortunate, but I think it's more important to keep the C-API
function names consistent.

-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-January/085121.html below:

[Python-Dev] Deprecate PyNumber_Long?