On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Eric Firing <efir...@hawaii.edu> wrote:
> On 07/08/2011 01:31 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote: > > I've just made pull request 105: > > > > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/105 > > > > It's merged, which is good, but I have a suggestion relevant to that > pull and I suspect to many others to come: use defines and macros to > consolidate some of the implementation details. For example: > > #define MASK_TYPE npy_uint8 > #define EXPOSE 1 > #define HIDE 0 > #define EXPOSED(mask) ( (*(MASK_TYPE *)mask)&0x01 == EXPOSE ) > > etc. > > The potential advantages are readability, reduction of scope for typos, > and ease of testing alternative implementation details, should that turn > out to be desirable. I am assuming that only a few expressions like > EXPOSED will be needed *many* places in the code. > That's a great idea, thanks. The one thing I would slightly adjust is to put everything in a 'macro namespace' to avoid global namespace pollution. Maybe: typedef npy_uint8 npy_mask; #define NPY_MASK NPY_UINT8 #define NPY_MASK_ISEXPOSED(mask) (((mask)&0x01) != 0) #define NPY_MASK_GETPAYLOAD(mask) (((npy_mask)mask) >> 1) #define NPY_MASK_MAKEMASK(exposed, payload) ((npy_mask)(exposed&0x01) | (npy_mask)(payload << 1)) -Mark > Eric > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
