On Apr 25, 2010, at 11:25 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: > Lisandro Dalcin wrote: >> On 25 April 2010 02:40, Stefan Behnel <[email protected]> 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. >>> >> >> I'm still not sure that defining ssize_t is a good idea. As the type >> is missing, we can expect that other API's could also define it. Then >> you #include a header, and get conflicting definitions. >> >> Other way I would not object so strongly is that ssize_t in Cython >> code actually emit Py_ssize_t in C code. Or perhaps better, invent >> our > > This is what I was suggesting.
That's what I thought. Let's do it. - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
