Re: [Python-Dev] C99

I think these features may improve C code readability. (Easy feature first). * // one line comment * inline function static inline function can be used instead of may macros. It is more readable, and type safe. * Designated Initializers; { .key = value };

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

Different question. What features are we actually talking about? Is it possible to enumerate them? The only thing I'm aware of is declarations following non-declarations in the same block, but I'm no C expert any more. On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Ned Deily wrote: > On Aug

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

On Aug 5, 2016, at 23:02, Nick Coghlan wrote: > As a pragmatic requirement, what if we went with: > > - must compile with the Python 3.5 Windows compiler (so MSVC 14.0) > - must compile with the Python 3.5 Mac OS X compiler (some version of clang?) > - must compile with the

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

On 6 August 2016 at 12:15, Steve Dower wrote: > FYI, it's MSVC 14.0 (which is included in VS 2015). > > Personally I'd like to see it restricted to the common subset of C99 and > some version of C++ (which is obviously mostly C and includes no C++), > because I know there

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

FYI, it's MSVC 14.0 (which is included in VS 2015). Personally I'd like to see it restricted to the common subset of C99 and some version of C++ (which is obviously mostly C and includes no C++), because I know there are a few things in C99 only that are very obscure because they aren't also

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 at 15:07 Guido van Rossum wrote: > That sounds fine to me, but we need to list specific compiler versions. > Would you want this to be static (e.g. MSVC 2016 until we choose to update to support C11), or would you want it to vary based on what's

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

I think if we want to revisit this in the future it should be an explicit change. On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 at 15:17 Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >> I want it to list specific versions that are known to be

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 at 15:17 Guido van Rossum wrote: > I want it to list specific versions that are known to be good right > now, so we can point fingers appropriately when a regression happens. > OK, then we could pin it to MSVC 2016, gcc 6.1, and clang 3.8.1 which are the

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

I want it to list specific versions that are known to be good right now, so we can point fingers appropriately when a regression happens. If you have to ask Steve what version he used, ask! On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 at 15:07

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

That sounds fine to me, but we need to list specific compiler versions. On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > Where did we finally land on this discussion? Do we want to update PEP 7 to > say that starting in 3.6 we may use C99 features common to all supported >

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

Where did we finally land on this discussion? Do we want to update PEP 7 to say that starting in 3.6 we may use C99 features common to all supported compilers and list what those compilers are (i.e. gcc, clang, and MSVC)? On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 at 01:28 Victor Stinner

[Python-Dev] Summary of Python tracker Issues

ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2016-07-29 - 2016-08-05) Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/ To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue. Do NOT respond to this message. Issues counts and deltas: open5589 ( +1) closed 33862 (+44) total 39451 (+45) Open issues

Re: [Python-Dev] Status of the Argument Clinic DSL

On 08/04/2016 11:58 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: I occasionally wonder if we should document the "/" notation in https://docs.python.org/3/library/inspect.html#introspecting-callables-with-the-signature-object as it can sometimes show up in the text representation of signature objects: >>>

Re: [Python-Dev] Status of the Argument Clinic DSL

On 5 August 2016 at 09:12, Larry Hastings wrote: > / is the delimiter between positional-only parameters and > positional-or-keyword arguments. It's not actual Python syntax, but Guido > said (somewhere) that *if* Python ever sprouted a syntax for positional-only >