Message169951
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. ) |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2012-09-06 22:47:48 | Alexander.Belopolsky | set | recipients:
+ Alexander.Belopolsky, loewis, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, Robin.Schreiber |
2012-09-06 22:47:47 | Alexander.Belopolsky | link | issue15870 messages |
2012-09-06 22:47:47 | Alexander.Belopolsky | create | |
|