Thomas Heller <thel...@ctypes.org> added the comment:
> I get the idea. The Python part of the patch demonstrates what you're
> getting at, though it can't be used as is - for example the
> getattr(logging, a, a) could lead to problems. However a more
> intelligent parser (which looked for specific keywords recognised by
> basicConfig(), and got the correct values accordingly) wouldn't be much
> more complicated. (I'll look at enhancing this part.)
>
> As for the changes to main.c - I am a C/C++ developer but have not made
> any changes to Python C code so far - it would be good if a more
> experienced committer reviews this part (not sure who - can someone
> please reassign/add to nosy list)? Thanks.
Both parts of the patch are only thought to demonstrate the idea.
You said you'll attack the Python part - good.
For the C part, the most prominemt things that are missing are these:
- free(logopt) should be called at the end of the 'if (logopts != NULL) {'
block.
- error handling should be improved. Errors in this block should probably exit
Python.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6958>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
