Author Alexander.Belopolsky
Recipients Alexander.Belopolsky, Robin.Schreiber, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, loewis
Date 2012-09-06.22:47:47
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1B2A3388-0D69-4999-BFDA-86E5101A5260@gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1346970348.9.0.769750937748.issue15870@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
On Sep 6, 2012, at 6:25 PM, Martin v. Löwis <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:

> I'm -1 on calling it PyType_FromSpecEx.

I find it encouraging that you commented on the choice of name. :-) I can live with PyType_FromMetatypeAndSpec and leave out bases.  PyType_FromTypeAndSpec is fine too. 

On the substance, I don't think this API is just convenience.  In my application I have to replace meta type after my type is created with PyType_FromSpec. This is fragile and works only for very simple metatypes.

Let's get back to this discussion once I have a ctypes patch.  I there will be a work-around for ctypes it will probably work for my case. (My case is a little bit more complicated because I extend the size of my type objects to store custom metadata.  Ctypes fudge this issue by hiding extra data in a custom tp_dict. )
History
Date User Action Args
2012-09-06 22:47:48Alexander.Belopolskysetrecipients: + Alexander.Belopolsky, loewis, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, Robin.Schreiber
2012-09-06 22:47:47Alexander.Belopolskylinkissue15870 messages
2012-09-06 22:47:47Alexander.Belopolskycreate