Lisandro Dalcin, 26.04.2010 01:41: > On 25 April 2010 02:40, Stefan Behnel wrote: >>>> >>>> My vote is in favor of simply always making "ssize_t" in Cython always >>>> mean Py_ssize_t in C. >>>> >>> >>> This sounds very reasonable to me. >> >> +1. If CPython defines one as the other anyway, > > Yes, but only if the ssize_t is available. > >> it won't make a difference >> in Py2.5+, and older Python versions a) have 64 bit issues anyway and b) >> are already out of maintenance and thus will die out rather sooner than >> later. > > Other way I would not object so strongly is that ssize_t in Cython > code actually emit Py_ssize_t in C code.
That's what I meant. CPython already does the checking for us and defines Py_ssize_t as ssize_t if it's there. If it's not there, Py_ssize_t will still have the right type, regardless of any additional definitions at C compile time, and guaranteed to be compatible with them. > Or perhaps better, invent our own __Pyx_ssize_t, and then: > > #ifndef __Pyx_ssize_t > #define __Pyx_ssize_t Py_ssize_t > #endif -1, Py_ssize_t already does that for us, so that would just add another level of superfluous indirection. Stefan _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
