Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Sep 5, 2009, at 3:42 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>> I am, much to my own surprise, starting to lean towards B, much  
>> because one could then see C++ auto-wrapped and usable right away.
> 
> Yep, I'm started out thinking very pro A, but now I'm leaning towards  
> B, for declarations at least.

Not being a C++ user, I don't care so much about the declaration syntax. In
case that's wanted, I'm fine with making the C++ declaration stuff C++
like, so that C++ users (who are the only ones who would use it anyway) can
express their intents more easily.

But I'm sure supporting any C++ specific syntax overloading in Cython
/code/ will not do any good to the language. To stay with the three
examples Dag gave, there is a *very* good reason why you have to write
"x[0]" in Cython instead of "*x", and that's simply that both are valid
Python code, but only the first means more or less what the C version
means. And giving C++ semantics to "++x" in Cython is just screaming for
trouble. That may be a bit less true for passing C++ references, but I
agree with Robert that that might block future developments of the Cython
compiler, and it certainly doesn't make the code more readable.

Stefan
_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to