toki doki, 02.07.2010 17:57:
>>> While  " *iter=5 " and " vect.at(0)=5 " ares valid C++ code.
>>
>> ... bug not valid Cython code.

This was supposed to spell "but not valid Python code".


>> If this is to be supported at all, it needs
>> at least a different spelling.
>>
> I see what you mean. Although "valid cython code" should be a moving
> target.

Sort of, but rather towards less special syntax and more Python syntax. 
"vect.at(0)=5" doesn't fit anything in Python and someone who wants to make 
that part of the language will have a hard time getting through my veto.


> "new vector[int]()" used to be invalid cython code too.

Right, and although I don't really like reading it, it only works within 
Cython code that targets C++ (and not pure Python code), so at least it 
doesn't hurt Python compatibility.


> Furthermore, it might also affect the  operator[] (but I can't test
> that due to bug#2). That would mean that "vect[3]=5" would also be
> refused by cython in spite of being valid cython code.

That is perfectly valid Python syntax, though. Overloading that to refer to 
the C++ [] operator when used on a C++ object sounds fine to me.


> I understand correct handling of c++ references will be difficult to
> solve

Absolutely.

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

Reply via email to