RetroSearch Browse

Thu Feb 27 11:47:06 CET 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-February/132818.html

Hi,

2014-02-27 11:22 GMT+01:00 Kristján Valur Jónsson <kristjan at ccpgames.com>:
> Now, Larry Hastings pointed out that we support C89 which doesn’t support
> Inlines.  Rather than suggesting here that we update that compatibility
> requirement,

In practice, recent versions of GCC and Clang are used. On Windows,
it's Visual Studio 2010. I'm pretty sure that these compilers support
inline functions.

I'm also in favor of using inline functions instead of long macros
using ugly hacks like "instr1,instr2" syntax where instr1 used
assert(). See for example unicodeobject.c to have an idea of what
horrible macros mean.

I'm in favor of dropping C89 support and require at least C99. There
is now C11, it's time to drop the old C89.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C11_%28C_standard_revision%29

Victor

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-February/132818.html below:

[Python-Dev] Start writing inlines rather than macros?