Robert Bradshaw, 08.12.2009 01:09:
> You do make a good argument for issuing a warning rather than an  
> error. Are you sure this is the only place we use the size of the  
> type? Should we be more strict with Cython-defined (non-extern) types?  
> Should we require that the struct size at least goes up? What about if  
> one tried to extend one of these "expanded" types?

FWIW, I'm for attempting to make this a warning depending on >= for
arbitrary non-subtyped external types that do not define any C methods, and
keeping the error strict for all subtyped types or those that do define C
methods. Disabling it completely is just asking for trouble.

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

Reply via email to