From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17339 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2017 16:51:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 17301 invoked by uid 89); 20 Jan 2017 16:51:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:51:55 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94E595F36; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:51:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.4]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v0KGpsBr027343; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 11:51:54 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix python-interactive with Python 3.6 To: Simon Marchi References: <20170120151550.24928-1-simon.marchi@ericsson.com> <1b7bea3d-3044-a643-d7b9-3b11db14758f@redhat.com> <5989286b709d1361c8bc9062567ffedf@polymtl.ca> Cc: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <323655f5-12bb-4245-0833-f38d94e63312@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:51:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5989286b709d1361c8bc9062567ffedf@polymtl.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-01/txt/msg00425.txt.bz2 On 01/20/2017 04:48 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > Yeah, I thought about that and concluded it would be a problem for my > grandchildren ;). > ;-) > ... and this is cleaner anyway. But why not just > > #if python < 3.4 > #define PyMem_RawMalloc PyMem_Malloc > #endif > > ? Because I was just copy/pasting from python-internal.h and didn't really think. :-) The other instances in python-internal.h do it like that because they need to redefine a symbol, not just define something missing. Thanks, Pedro Alves