On 2009-12-07 18:09 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > You do make a good argument for issuing a warning rather than an > error. Are you sure this is the only place we use the size of the > type? Should we be more strict with Cython-defined (non-extern) types?
I think that there is a use case for this. I believe that a Pyrex type hierarchy across modules was Greg's original use case for this check in the first place, not extern types from non-Pyrex extension modules. The former will be pretty common as one develops a collection of Cython module and rebuilds one module but not another. The latter case is much rarer, mostly because without Cython's syntax support, writing types and subclassing them is such a bear. I conjecture that pure C type writers will be more careful about only extending types that are not likely to have subtypes, as in the numpy.dtype case. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
