On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 08:21, Hirokazu Yamamoto <ocean-city at m2.ccsnet.ne.jp>wrote: > On 2010/08/07 19:18, Ronald Oussoren wrote: > >> >> On 7 Aug, 2010, at 10:24, Hirokazu Yamamoto wrote: >> >> This is the idea just popped up. :-) >>> >>> #define SIG(name) if (sig_num != SIG##name) >>> SIG(ABRT) SIG(FPE) SIG(ILL) SIG(INT) SIG(SEGV) SIG(TERM) { >>> PyErr_SetString(PyExc_ValueError, "signal number out of range"); >>> return NULL; >>> } >>> #undef SIG >>> >> >> What's wrong with: >> >> switch (sig_num) { >> case SIGABRT: >> case SIGFPE: >> ... >> case SIGTERM: >> break; >> default: >> PyErr_SetString(...) >> return NULL; >> } >> >> That would IMO be clearer than the macro you propose. >> >> Ronald >> > > Hmm... I liked the macro idea, but nothing is wrong with switch > statement. I had thought about doing this via switch statement. I'll propose a patch and post it on #9324. As for the "out of range" comment -- true, it's not technically a range on Windows, but it matches the exception wording when we raise on Mac/Linux for the same reason. I can change that. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20100807/85bfbebc/attachment-0001.html>
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