Stefan Krah added the comment: Larry Hastings <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > I disagree that the Clinic DSL is "verbose". Certainly I find it > more succinct than what we do now.
I was referring to the total size of the generated output, not to the DSL. > On the other hand, the syntax you proposed in the python-dev message > you cite is insufficient to the task. [...] Actually this was Stefan Behnel's suggestion. Thanks for the explanation. > To answer 5), you're the only C contributor who comes to mind who > seems unhappy. Do I understand you correctly that your main pain > point is that you generate scores of identical functions with the > C preprocessor, and you see no way to do that with Clinic? If we > figured out a way to make that work with Clinic, would that reduce > your concerns? No, the main problem is the amount of vertical space that's consumed. I've looked at os_access etc., and it seems that about 100 lines will be produced per function. The size of _decimal.c would go up from 5700 to something like 15000 lines. You can do similar math for posixmodule.c. Even with tools like ctags, I find code with a huge proportion of boilerplate harder to understand and to navigate. Also, I think that specifications of a declarative nature logically belong into header files, but currently I don't see a nice way to make that happen. ---------- title: Integrate "Argument Clinic" specialized preprocessor into CPython trunk -> Integrate "Argument Clinic" specialized preprocessor into CPython trunk _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16612> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
