On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 20.08.2012 17:54:
>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> I'm getting test build failures with the new arrayarray.h header file when
>>> I enable "--std=c89" or "c99" in the CFLAGS:
>>>
>>> """
>>> memoryview_inplace_division.c:877: warning: declaration does not declare
>>> anything
>>> memoryview_inplace_division.c:893: warning: declaration does not declare
>>> anything
>>> memoryview_inplace_division.c: In function ‘newarrayobject’:
>>> memoryview_inplace_division.c:929: error: ‘arrayobject’ has no member named
>>> ‘ob_item’
>>> ...
>>> """
>>>
>>> The lines it warns about (and which trigger the subsequent errors) are the
>>> following union declarations:
>>>
>>> """
>>> typedef struct arrayobject {
>>> PyObject_HEAD
>>> union {
>>> Py_ssize_t ob_size, length;
>>> };
>>> union {
>>> char *ob_item;
>>> float *_f;
>>> double *_d;
>>> int *_i;
>>> unsigned *_I;
>>> unsigned char *_B;
>>> signed char *_b;
>>> char *_c;
>>> unsigned long *_L;
>>> long *_l;
>>> short *_h;
>>> unsigned short *_H;
>>> Py_UNICODE *_u;
>>> void *_v;
>>> };
>>> ...
>>> """
>>>
>>> Apparently, anonymous unions only became part of the C standard in C11:
>>>
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3228104/anonymous-union-within-struct-not-in-c99
>>>
>>> That's unfortunate, but I think we'd best give the unions a name (and let
>>> users change all code that uses them ...).
>>
>> I suppose we could do this. Actually, my_array.data.* isn't that bad.
>> (Would it be to verbose to do "my_array.data.as_doubles" while we're
>> on the topic of changing names?)
>
> +1 - people who care about shortcuts will use memory views anyway.
>
> I'll change it.
>
>
>>> BTW, is there any reason we have a "length" field at all? Shouldn't we be
>>> using Py_SIZE() ?
>>
>> I just kept the code as it was (which is why I added the extra compile
>> args), but wouldn't be opposed to this change either. Supporting
>> itemsize directly might be more useful.
>
> Hmm - how would you make "self->ob_descr->itemsize" available more directly?
I assume it's a function of Py_SIZE and sizeof(PyObject_HEAD), but
that's all the thinking I did about it.
- Robert
_______________________________________________
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
