Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Lisandro Dalcin wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Robert Bradshaw >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Nov 3, 2009, at 12:45 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Robert Bradshaw wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> There's >>>>>> another regression, "cdef int complex" doesn't work anymore (our >>>>>> structs used to support this, as does gcc, even if it's non-c99). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Turns out this broke nearly all my own code :-( I'll give a proper >>>>> solution a go. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Thanks! It think it should be pretty easy (probably can use the type >>>> name, rather than the math postfix marker to name the methods...) >>>> >>>> http://trac.cython.org/cython_trac/ticket/446 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Or use other approach for handling "int complex" types. Honestly, I >>> did not take into account this use case. >>> >>> Mmm... I'm thinking that trying to support (floating) complex in C89 >>> is not a good idea, some things are really hard to do (if ever >>> possible)... >>> >>> >> Huh? Do you mean what's there already? >> >> > > No, just the "Seamless" support... I mean, if the 'ccomplex' directive > is not on, then make Cython generate an error when external ctypedefs > are used, and any other situation where there is ambiguity... > Hmm. I don't think C89 complex is really the problem. There's plenty of similar problems like the functions for integer division and (in future) overloaded functions.
Dag Sverre _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
