On 1 October 2017 at 22:19, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: >> 2. We could reinterpret "optimize" as a bitfield instead of a regular >> integer, special casing the already defined values: >> >> - all zero: no optimizations >> - sign bit set: negative -> use global settings >> - 0x0001: nodebug+noassert >> - 0x0002: nodebug+noassert+nodocstrings >> - 0x0004: nodebug >> - 0x0008: noassert >> - 0x0010: nodocstrings > > Well, this is not really a bitfield, but a bitfield plus some irregular > hardcoded values. Therefore I don't think it brings much in the way of > discoverability / understandability.
That's why the 2-field struct for compiler flags was my first idea. > That said, perhaps it makes implementation easier on the C side... Yep, the fact it would avoid requiring any ABI changes for the C API is the main reason I think redefining the semantics of the existing int parameter is worth considering. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
