On Oct 19, 2009, at 7:28 AM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Robert Bradshaw
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:02 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>>
>>> Personally, I would prefer either 1) or 3), the latter likely being
>>> more
>>> convenient but potentially introducing new pitfalls elsewhere (to be
>>> seen).
>>>
>>> Comments?
>>
>> I'm for (2) or (3), with a preference for (2). Option (1) will break
>> code (which I'm strongly against) and (3) seems prone to pitfalls as
>> you mention.
>>
>
> Yes, I also prefer (2). Anyway, I'm not going to implement it ;-) ...
>
> Robert, I also hate to break code. But I also hate to ask developer's
> to spend its time on supporting features related to ambiguities...
> IMHO, this is a case where "In the face of ambiguity, refuse the
> temptation to guess." applies.
>
> So I would say that (1) is out for backward compatibility reasons,
> then choose from (2) or (3) the easiest one to implement, and emit
> warnings about using unprefixed 1-string literals in char contexts.
> Hopefully, the warnings will be annoying enough to "force" users to
> update their code. Then I would not care too much about the possible
> pitfalls of (3), in case of (3) being the way to follow because it is
> the easiest to implement.

You are assuming requiring the c prefix is a good thing--I think it's  
very useful to be able to omit it, and it certainly shouldn't have a  
warning. I bet most people haven't even heard of the c prefix...

- Robert


_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to