On 8/15/2011 9:49 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Aug 15, 2011, at 05:46 AM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
I don't think that is worth it. There is some value to keeping the API
consistent with the style that has been used in the past. So, I vote for
Py_RETURN_NOTIMPLEMENTED. There's no real need to factor this any further.
It's not hard and not important enough to introduce a new variation on return
macros. Adding another return style makes the C API harder to learn and
remember. If we we're starting from scratch, Py_RETURN(obj) would make
sense. But we're not starting from scratch, so we should stick with the
precedents.
I can see the small value in the convenience, but I tend to agree with Raymond
here. I think we have to be careful about not descending into macro
obfuscation world.
Coming fresh to the C-API, as I partly am, I would rather have exactly 1
generally useful macro that increments the refcount of an object and
returns it. To me, multiple special-case, seldom-used macros are a
better example of 'macro obfuscation'.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
