Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: > OTOH, this brings up another interesting question: What happens with > exporting templates to Python-land? > > If there was indeed something very like typedef, but which also made the > templated type available Python-side... > > I guess > > IntVector = Vector<int> > > would currently achieve that without any further magic though.
Sure. > With [] or () or somesuch one could export some wrapper type for > "Vector" and look up the Vector[cython.int] type from Python-space, > however one must know compile-time which templates to instantiate for > Python access anyway. The template types to always instantiate and > export to Python could perhaps be embedded in the template declaration > syntax. Why? If you want to provide a type to Python space, you can just instantiate it somewhere in your program, e.g. by adding it to a name->type mapping. No magic whatsoever involved. > (I'd say that's a valid usecase eventually, but of course not something > to support at first. But it /does/ impact the chosen syntax quite > heavily as <> is ruled straight out.) The syntax would be Cython-only, no need to move it into Python. Stefan _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
