Reference behavior through C (was: Lambda going out of fashion)
craig at postnewspapers.com.au
Tue Dec 28 22:50:02 CET 2004
On Wed, 2004-12-29 at 02:08, Cameron Laird wrote:
> In article <mailman.8308.1103787075.5135.python-list at python.org>,
> Craig Ringer <craig at postnewspapers.com.au> wrote:
> > IMO the reference behaviour of functions in the C API could be
> >clearer. [snip] .
> This is a sensitive area for me, too. I'd welcome insight
> on how to think about this. If Pythonia were a better place
> in this regard, how would it be? Reference documents that
> more transparently define reference behavior?
I think the current documentation does a fairly good job of that when
describing how to treat the return values of the various functions, but
a much poorer one when covering their arguments.
> A convention for API names that reveals reference characteristics?
That is what I'd lean towards personally... but of course there's
duplication and compatibility to be considered.
More information about the Python-list