Daniel Diniz <aja...@gmail.com> added the comment: >> BTW, there's a warning in _struct.c:180 -> warning: 'get_ulong' >> defined but not used, should I open a new issue? > > Sure. Please could you add me to the nosy list if you do.
OK, should do that soon. > In my opinion, the struct module *really* needs an overhaul, especially > for py3k; there's a lot of inconsistency in the behaviour with respect > to different integer types, and there's a lot of code that seems to be > there purely for backwards compatibility that could be removed for 3.1 > (and probably for 2.7 as well): for example, allowing floats when > packing integer types, and allowing overflow to wraparound rather than > raising an exception. This one looks bad: #2590. > Would it be worth opening a general 'overhaul the struct module' issue > and marking all the current struct bugs as dependencies for this issue? I can't judge on the merit of struct's shortcomings, but I'll propose the 'umbrella issue' idea for other targets (socket, HTMLParser, etc.) on python-dev and can suggest one for struct too. _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3694> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
