David Abrahams schrieb: > #if PY_VERSION_HEX < 0x02050000 > typedef int Py_ssize_t; > #define PY_SSIZE_T_MAX INT_MAX > #define PY_SSIZE_T_MIN INT_MIN > #endif > > I just wanted to point out that this advice could lead to library > header collisions when multiple 3rd parties decide to follow it. I > suggest it be changed to something like: > > #if PY_VERSION_HEX < 0x02050000 && !defined(PY_SSIZE_T_MIN)
Strictly speaking, this shouldn't be necessary. C allows redefinition of an object-like macro if the replacement list is identical (for some definition of identical which applies if the fragment is copied literally from the PEP). So I assume you had non-identical replacement list? Can you share what alternative definition you were using? In any case, I still think this is good practice, so I added it to the PEP. > (C++ allows restating of typedefs; if C allows it, that should be > something like): C also allows this; yet, our advise would be that these three names get always defined together - if that is followed, having a single guard macro should suffice. PY_SSIZE_T_MIN, as you propose, should be sufficient. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
