On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 02:54:34PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Jan 3, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Martin v. L�wis wrote:
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
Maybe this should be done in a more systematic fashion? E.g. by giving all "internal" header files a "py_" prefix?
Yet another alternative would be to move all such header files into a py/ directory, so you would refer to them as
#include "py/object.h"
Any preferences?
I think I prefer this, although I'd choose "python/object.h" just for explicitness. But if you go with a header prefix, then the shorter "py_" is fine.
FWIW, I tried to do a quick grep around some of our code and I found that the only "internal" header we include is structmember.h. Why is that not part of Python.h again?
-Barry
+1 on using the python/*.h subdirectory. +0.2 on renaming only the whined about .h file. +0.1 on using a py_ prefix for all .h files. I prefer the python/*.h subdirectory method. py_ in the filename is ugly and annoying even if it does solve the immediate issue. Other packages that install header files commonly put them all within a named subdirectory. -Greg