[Numpy-discussion] C99

Ralf Gommers ralf.gommers at gmail.com
Sat Sep 8 13:02:12 EDT 2018


On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 6:07 AM Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:02 AM Eric Wieser <wieser.eric+numpy at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the first step on this!
>>
>> Should we allow // style comments
>>
>> I don’t think it matters too much. I think it might be a little messy to
>> have a mix of the two styles where // means “post py3” and /* */ means
>> pre-py3 - but at the same time, I do slightly prefer the C++-style. For C
>> contributors coming from python, I’d expect that it feels more natural to
>> only have to put a comment marker at the start of the line. We could
>> convert the /**/-style to //-style with a tool, but it’s probably not
>> worth the churn or time.
>>
>> Should we allow variable declarations after code
>>
>> I’d be very strongly in favor of this - it makes it much easier to
>> extract helper functions if variables are declared as late as they can be -
>> plus it make it easier to reason about early returns not needing goto
>> fail.
>>
>> Related to this feature, I think allowing for(int i = 0; i < N; i++) is
>> a clear win.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>
> Thinking about this some more, a good argument for going to full C99 is
> that outside code written in that style can be brought in without a lot of
> work.
>

Agreed. And we already have the pocketfft PR to prove that.

Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20180908/4315ff5a/attachment.html>


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list