On 2009-12-08 11:42 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:42 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote: > >> >> 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 > > OK, sounds like we're in agreement.
+1. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
