[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022, 3:02 am Guido van Rossum, wrote: > > I think picking "semi-stable" would be giving in to the OCD nerd in all of > us. :-) While perhaps technically less precise, "unstable" is the catchy > name with the right association. (And yes, we should keep it stable within > bugfix

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

On 2022-04-30 03:17, Greg Ewing wrote: On 30/04/22 5:25 am, MRAB wrote: I was going to suggest "metastable". Too late? :-) What, the API is balanced on a knife edge and likely to collapse into something else if you sneeze too hard? There's a possibility that the universe might be metastable,

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

On 30/04/22 5:25 am, MRAB wrote: I was going to suggest "metastable". Too late? :-) What, the API is balanced on a knife edge and likely to collapse into something else if you sneeze too hard? -- Greg ___ Python-Dev mailing list --

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

On 4/29/2022 11:42 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: MRAB writes: > On 2022-04-29 18:02, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:15 AM Petr Viktorin > > wrote: > > > > On 29. 04. 22 16:32, Victor Stinner wrote: > > > Ok, let me start with

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

MRAB writes: > On 2022-04-29 18:02, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:15 AM Petr Viktorin > > wrote: > > > > On 29. 04. 22 16:32, Victor Stinner wrote: > > > Ok, let me start with the serious business: API name. > > > > > >

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

On 2022-04-29 18:02, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:15 AM Petr Viktorin > wrote: On 29. 04. 22 16:32, Victor Stinner wrote: > Ok, let me start with the serious business: API name. > > I'm not comfortable with "semi-stable". Python

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

I think that the main advantage of "unstable" over "semi-stable" is that it's a single word :-D It avoids the really hard question (!) about the separator between "semi" and "stable" ;-) (semistable? semi-stable? semi_stable?). Victor ___ Python-Dev

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:15 AM Petr Viktorin wrote: > On 29. 04. 22 16:32, Victor Stinner wrote: > > Ok, let me start with the serious business: API name. > > > > I'm not comfortable with "semi-stable". Python already has a "limited > > API" and a "stable ABI". Just by its name, it's unclear

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

On 29. 04. 22 16:32, Victor Stinner wrote: Ok, let me start with the serious business: API name. I'm not comfortable with "semi-stable". Python already has a "limited API" and a "stable ABI". Just by its name, it's unclear what "semi-stable" means. Honestly, I would be more comfortable with

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

> Rejected Ideas > == > > It might be good to add a similar tier in the Python (not C) API, > e.g. for ``types.CodeType``. > However, the opt-in mechanism would need to be different (if any). > This is outside the scope of the PEP. For types.CodeType constructor, would it be possible

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

Ok, let me start with the serious business: API name. I'm not comfortable with "semi-stable". Python already has a "limited API" and a "stable ABI". Just by its name, it's unclear what "semi-stable" means. Honestly, I would be more comfortable with the name: "unstable API". It would be clear