On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:19:43 -0400 Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org> wrote:
On Oct 11, 2011, at 02:36 PM, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
On 10/08/2011 04:54 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
tmp = PyObject_CallMethod(result, "update", "O", other);
would be replaced with
PyObject *tmp; Py_identifier(update); ... tmp = PyObject_CallMethodId(result,&PyId_update, "O", other);
An alternative I am fond of is to to avoid introducing a new type, and simply initialize a PyObject * and register its address. For example:
PyObject *tmp; static PyObject *s_update; // pick a naming convention
PY_IDENTIFIER_INIT(update); tmp = PyObject_CallMethodObj(result, s_update, "O", other);
(but also PyObject_GetAttr(o, s_update), etc.)
I like this better too because of the all-caps macro name. Something about seeing "Py_identifier" look like a function call and having it add the magical PyId_update local bugs me. It just looks wrong, whereas the all-caps is more of a cultural clue that something else is going on.
+1 for something more recognizable. I think "const string" is more accurate than "identifier" as well. Regards Antoine.