Stefan Krah <stefan-use...@bytereef.org> added the comment: Re: EOF checking in Py_ISXXX() for consistency with C functions.
After reflecting on this a bit I think it's ultimately not a good idea. While it is possible to do the EOF check, the macros would then take either an int in [EOF, 0-UCHAR_MAX] or a signed/unsigned char. This would be another inconsistency with the C functions, which are not supposed to take a signed char. I checked every usage of Py_IS* in the tree and this is an isolated case. So I think it's better to do the check explicitly and add a comment to the Py_IS* macros. Does the patch look good? ---------- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file17743/check_eof.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9020> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
