RetroSearch Browse

Sun Jun 24 06:56:30 CEST 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-June/120742.html

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Christian Heimes <lists at cheimes.de> wrote:
> Am 24.06.2012 01:11, schrieb Larry Hastings:
>> On 06/23/2012 03:08 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>>> On 23.06.2012 23:41, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>>> Perhaps something more user-friendly than the hexversion?
>>> Please propose something. I think the hexversion *is* user-friendly,
>>
>> +1 to the idea, and specifically to using hexversion here.
>
> +1 for the general idea and for using Py_LIMITED_API. I still like my
> idea of a simple macro based on Include/patchlevel.h, for example:
>
> #define Py_API_VERSION(major, minor, micro) \
>   (((major) << 24) | ((minor) << 16) | ((micro) << 8))
>
> #if Py_LIMITED_API+0 >= Py_API_VERSION(3, 3, 0)
> #endif

+1 to all 3 of those from me (the general idea, using hexversion, and
providing a convenience macro to skip having to spell out hexversion
manually).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-June/120742.html below:

[Python-Dev] Restricted API versioning