RetroSearch Browse

Mon Aug 4 19:53:19 CEST 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-August/135661.html

Le 04/08/2014 13:36, Alexander Belopolsky a écrit :
>
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us
> <mailto:ethan at stoneleaf.us>> wrote:
>
>     'allow_none' is definitely clearer.
>
>
> I disagree. Unlike "nullable", "allow_none" does not tell me what
> happens on the C side when I pass in None.  If the receiving type is
> PyObject*, either NULL or Py_None is a valid choice.

But here the receiving type can be an int.

Regards

Antoine.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-August/135661.html below:

[Python-Dev] Surely "nullable" is a reasonable name?