Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-03-08 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Collin Winter schrieb: > Was any course of action ever decided on for this issue, or was the > consensus that it would break too much code? If the latter, what about > making the change for Python 3000? Neither, nor. If a grand renaming is not feasible, I'd atleast do something about object.h for

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-03-08 Thread Collin Winter
On 1/3/07, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/3/07, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On 1/3/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 1/3/07, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 03 January 2007 11:06, Martin v. Löwis wro

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-02-26 Thread Neal Norwitz
On 2/25/07, Jeremy Hylton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/3/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be > > renamed, because it causes conflicts with other software. > > > > I would like to comply with this requests for 2.6, a

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-02-25 Thread Jeremy Hylton
On 1/3/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be > renamed, because it causes conflicts with other software. > > I would like to comply with this requests for 2.6, assuming there > shouldn't be many problems with existing softwa

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-05 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Andrea Griffini schrieb: > I've a partially related question... why isn't the module structure in > an include file .h > and is instead in Objects/moduleobject.c ? > For the cached lookup optimization I copied the definition but that's surely > a bad way to do it I however wondered if there we

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-04 Thread Andrea Griffini
Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Neal Norwitz schrieb: > >> Wow, I didn't realize I was that much of a broken record. :-) >> I don't even remember talking to Thomas about it, only Guido. I >> definitely would like to see all private header files clearly denoted >> by their name or directory. >> >

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Neal Norwitz
On 1/3/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Neal Norwitz schrieb: > > Wow, I didn't realize I was that much of a broken record. :-) > > I don't even remember talking to Thomas about it, only Guido. I > > definitely would like to see all private header files clearly denoted > > by the

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Neal Norwitz schrieb: > Wow, I didn't realize I was that much of a broken record. :-) > I don't even remember talking to Thomas about it, only Guido. I > definitely would like to see all private header files clearly denoted > by their name or directory. What is a private header file, and does Pyt

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Neal Norwitz
On 1/3/07, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 1/3/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 1/3/07, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wednesday 03 January 2007 11:06, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > > > > In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Thomas Wouters
On 1/3/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thomas Wouters schrieb: > (Only for header > files that should really be internal, of course, not ones that are > oft-used outside the core.) Which are these? Mostly structmember.h and structseq.h, less often code.h, compile.h, frameobj

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Jack Jansen
On 3-Jan-2007, at 23:17 , Gregory P. Smith wrote: > +1 on using the python/*.h subdirectory. I'm a bit concerned about the "python/*.h": could it cause trouble in combination with Apple's framework naming convention (#include magically gets the header out of the quicktime framework) and

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Gregory P. Smith
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 02:54:34PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Jan 3, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Martin v. L?wis wrote: > > > Guido van Rossum schrieb: > >> Maybe this should be done in a more systematic fashion? E.g. by > >> giving all "internal" header files a "py_" prefix? > > > > Yet another alte

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Barry Warsaw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jan 3, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Guido van Rossum schrieb: >> Maybe this should be done in a more systematic fashion? E.g. by >> giving >> all "internal" header files a "py_" prefix? > > Yet another alternative would be to move a

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Thomas Wouters schrieb: > (Only for header > files that should really be internal, of course, not ones that are > oft-used outside the core.) Which are these? Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailm

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Brett Cannon
On 1/3/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Guido van Rossum schrieb: > Maybe this should be done in a more systematic fashion? E.g. by giving > all "internal" header files a "py_" prefix? Yet another alternative would be to move all such header files into a py/ directory, so you wo

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Fred L. Drake, Jr.
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 14:29, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Yet another alternative would be to move all such header files into a > py/ directory, so you would refer to them as > > #include "py/object.h" > > Any preferences? None here; the goal is the only part I care about. -Fred --

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Guido van Rossum schrieb: > Maybe this should be done in a more systematic fashion? E.g. by giving > all "internal" header files a "py_" prefix? Yet another alternative would be to move all such header files into a py/ directory, so you would refer to them as #include "py/object.h" Any preferenc

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread skip
>> > In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be >> > renamed, because it causes conflicts with other software. ... Guido> Maybe this should be done in a more systematic fashion? E.g. by Guido> giving all "internal" header files a "py_" prefix? Grand Renaming,

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Fred L. Drake, Jr.
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 12:38, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Maybe this should be done in a more systematic fashion? E.g. by giving > all "internal" header files a "py_" prefix? Even better. +42 -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. ___ Python-Dev mai

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Thomas Wouters
On 1/3/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 1/3/07, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 03 January 2007 11:06, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > > In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be > > renamed, because it causes conflicts with other sof

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Guido van Rossum
On 1/3/07, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 03 January 2007 11:06, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > > In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be > > renamed, because it causes conflicts with other software. > > > > I would like to comply with this requests

Re: [Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Fred L. Drake, Jr.
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 11:06, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be > renamed, because it causes conflicts with other software. > > I would like to comply with this requests for 2.6, assuming there > shouldn't be many problems with existin

[Python-Dev] Renaming Include/object.h

2007-01-03 Thread Martin v. Löwis
In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be renamed, because it causes conflicts with other software. I would like to comply with this requests for 2.6, assuming there shouldn't be many problems with existing software as object.h shouldn't be included directly, anyway. What do y