Message 261487 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	martin.panter
Recipients	Alex.Willmer, martin.panter, paul.moore, rpetrov, steve.dower, tim.golden, zach.ware
Date	2016-03-10.09:30:53
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<[email protected]>
In-reply-to

Content
What’s the point of allowing each macro to already be defined? I understand they may also be defined by PC/pyconfig.h, but is that possible if __MINGW32__ is defined? Is the __MINGW32__ condition needed at all? Maybe we can just blindly rely on the _WIN32 etc macros. Perhaps the PC/pyconfig.h definitions could be removed in favour of the ones in "pyport.h"?

What’s the point of allowing each macro to already be defined? I understand they may also be defined by PC/pyconfig.h, but is that possible if __MINGW32__ is defined?

Is the __MINGW32__ condition needed at all? Maybe we can just blindly rely on the _WIN32 etc macros. Perhaps the PC/pyconfig.h definitions could be removed in favour of the ones in "pyport.h"?

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2016-03-10 09:30:53	martin.panter	set	recipients: + martin.panter, paul.moore, tim.golden, rpetrov, zach.ware, steve.dower, Alex.Willmer
2016-03-10 09:30:53	martin.panter	set	messageid: <[email protected]>
2016-03-10 09:30:53	martin.panter	link	issue17590 messages
2016-03-10 09:30:53	martin.panter	create