On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:36 AM, Stefan Krah <ste...@bytereef.org> wrote:
> Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org> wrote:
>> * The DSL currently makes no provision for specifying per-parameter
>> type annotations. This is something explicitly supported in Python;
>> it should be supported for builtins too, once we have reflection support.
>>
>> It seems to me that the syntax for parameter lines--dictated by
>> Guido--suggests conversion functions are themselves type annotations.
>> This makes intuitive sense.
>
> Really, did you read PEP 437? It's all in there.
This attitude is unhelpful. Please stop being outright hostile. If you
want to have any influence on the outcome at all, consider looking
into compromises.
>> But my thought experiments in how to convert the conversion function
>> specification into a per-parameter type annotation ranged from obnoxious
>> to toxic; I don't think that
>> line of thinking will bear fruit.
>
> Did you look at the patch that I posted in issue #16612? It's already
> implemented:
>
> $ ./printsemant Tools/preprocess/testcases/posix_stat.c
> PROGRAM[
> SOURCE[...],
> DEFINE[
> CNAME posix_stat,
> SPEC[
> DECLARATION
> { fun_fqname = os.stat,
> fun_name = stat,
> fun_cname = posix_stat,
> fun_kind = Keywords,
> fun_params = [
> { param_name = path,
> param_type = [bytes, int, str], <== here it is
> param_default = NONE,
> param_kind = (PosOrKwd, Required),
> param_conv = path_converter,
> param_parseargs = [
> ConvArg { arg_name = path_converter,
> arg_type = int (*converter)(PyObject *, void *)
> arg_use_ptr = false },
> MainArg { arg_name = path,
> arg_type = path_t,
> arg_use_ptr = true }]},
> [...]
I can assure you nobody downloaded your binaries. The security
implications are just too scary.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________
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
