On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Greg Ewing<[email protected]> wrote: > Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: > >> This is hardly satisfying, and SOME kind of solution is needed here. If >> only to prevent subtle bugs from mixing types from numpy.pxd with other >> types in arithmetic! > > If you do this, you might like to consider a syntax > I suggested earlier: > > ctypedef some int foo > ctypedef some float bar > > etc. > > I think this is better than something like int? or > ?int because it makes it clear that the uncertainty > is about the size of the type, not its basic kind. >
I agree... > Some thoughts on implementation: > > * Treat it as having a rank higher than any known > rank for that kind. That way arithmetic etc. between > known and unknown sizes will get promoted to an > unknown size. > I was also thinking about this way... I cannot imagine right now a case were this breaks... > * Only allow it to be introduced via a typedef, so > that generated code always has a named type for the > C compiler to go on. > Likely you mean EXTERNAL ctypedefs, right? In such case, that's the intention... Greg, many thanks for your input... -- Lisandro Dalcín --------------- Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC) Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594 _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
