Le lundi 17 octobre 2011 23:27:09, Antoine Pitrou a écrit : > On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 02:04:38 +0200 > > Victor Stinner <victor.stin...@haypocalc.com> wrote: > > Le lundi 17 octobre 2011 01:16:36, Victor Stinner a écrit : > > > For example, IN.INT_MAX is 2147483647, whereas it should > > > be 9223372036854775807 on my 64-bit Linux. > > > > Oops, wrong example: INT_MAX is also 2147483647 on 64 bits. I mean > > IN.LONG_MAX. > > > > IN.LONG_MAX is always 9223372036854775807 on Linux, on 32 and 64 bits > > systems. > > Given the issues you are mentioning, and given they were never > reported in years before, it seems unlikely anybody is using these > files. > > +1 to remove them, as they don't seem documented either.
Oh, there are other (new?) problems listed in last comments of the issue #12619. The Mac OS X issue is funny. Extracts: "What do you do for platforms like OS X where we support one set of binary files that contain multi-architecture C-files that can run as Intel-64, Intel-32 or PPC-32 on the same machine at user option at run time? (...) The static IN.py currently shipped in plat-darwin is misleading at best." "-1 on auto-building. The header needed may not be available on the build platform, (...)" "There is no reason to keep plat-xxx files if cannot be managed properly." Victor _______________________________________________ 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
