RetroSearch Browse

Fri Feb 28 16:19:48 CET 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-February/132856.html

On Feb 28, 2014, at 10:27 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:

>With the new macro in place, the existing Py_CLEAR(x) macro would be
>equivalent to Py_SETREF(x, NULL).
>
>Originally I was also concerned about the "how will people know there's no
>implicit incref?", but I've since become satisfied with the fact that the
>precedent set by the reference stealing SET_ITEM macros is strong enough to
>justify the shorter name.

I haven't had time to follow this discussion at all, but for a macro to be
called Py_SETREF and *not* increment the reference counter seems at best
confusing.  Despite my hesitation to paint a bike shed I haven't had time to
inspect, something more akin to Py_SET_POINTER seems more appropriate
(i.e. don't put "REF" in the name if it isn't playing refcounting games).

-Barry

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-February/132856.html below:

[Python-Dev] Poll: Py_REPLACE/Py_ASSIGN/etc