On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 09:20:56 +1000 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Four options come to mind: > > - just leave it out of the limited API, extensions can do their own > thing to print objects > - leave PyObject_Print out of the limited API, but create a > PyObject_PrintEx that takes a Python IO stream via PyObject* rather > than a C level FILE*. > - leave PyObject_Print out of the limited API, but create a > PyObject_PrintEx that takes function pointers for the above 4 > operations (so the FILE* pointer is only every operated on by > functions from the extension module's CRT) > - leave PyObject_Print out of the limited API, but create a > PyObject_PRINT macro that does much the same thing with the logic > rearranged so there is an inner function that figures out the string > to be printed, but an outer macro that does all the operations on the > FILE * object (so again, the FILE * is never passed to Python's CRT)
Fifth option: - make PyObject_Print() an inline function (similar to your macro proposal), but only on Windows. This would retain the name and current signature. Apparently we could use something like "__forceinline" or "extern __forceinline"? Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
