I agree with NICK.  having REF in it is a good idea.

So, I’m +1 on setref.

Having long explicit macros with exact semantics in the name is a bad one.

so I’m -1 on any Py_DECREF_AND_REPLACE or similar daschhunds.

Also, is there any real requirement for having separate non-X versions of these?

The Xs constitue a permutation explosion, particularly if you want then also versions that INCREF the source J

K

From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+kristjan=ccpgames.com@python.org] On Behalf Of Nick Coghlan
Sent: 27. febrúar 2014 00:12
To: Antoine Pitrou
Cc: python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Poll: Py_REPLACE/Py_ASSIGN/etc

On 27 Feb 2014 04:28, "Antoine Pitrou" <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 11:40:01 +0200
> Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > There were several suggestions for naming new macros which replace old
> > value with new value and then (x)decref old value.
> >
> > #define Py_XXX(ptr, value)        \
> >      {                             \
> >          PyObject *__tmp__ = ptr;  \
> >          ptr = new_value;          \
> >          Py_DECREF(__tmp__);       \
> >      }
>
>
> > 1. Py_(X)SETREF.
>
> My vote is on this one.
> I'm also -1 on any name which doesn't have "REF" in it; the name should
> clearly suggest that it's a refcounting operation.

Yeah, I think SETREF is my favourite as well (even though some of the later suggestions were mine).

Cheers,
Nick.

>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ncoghlan%40gmail.com