On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:31 PM, David Cournapeau < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > I'm pretty sure about the reference leak. But what should be the > > standard for checking arguments and error returns in these object loops? > > I was wondering the same when I worked on that code a few weeks ago; > since the ufunc "return" void, I wonder how feasible it would be to > return an int instead for error messaging. Since the ufunc are not used > directly outside numpy, it should not break the API/ABI in any way ? > I had thoughts along the same line. I think we could easily make all the returns ints because the return value would simply be discarded. The question is what to do with it if we have it. > I think more generally it would be nice to have a common error system > for the pure C code, because it is a bit of a mess right now. But that > would be again a lot of work :) Yep. And tracking/checking all those errors back up the call chain is a pain. The best argument for C++ I can think of is the exception handling... Chuck
_______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
