STINNER Victor <vstin...@python.org> added the comment:
> On such platforms, the `PyGet_Foo` API can be on equal footing with the > legacy `Py_Foo` statics, i.e. both would do the same thing. That's how I've > done it in my experiment. The obvious problem is that on platforms without > compiler support for TLS, `Py_Foo` would be unavailable, and that's probably > a no-go for an API that wouldn't be deprecated. My GH-18301 PR uses "#define Py_None Py_GetNone()" which is backward compatible in terms of API. Py_GetNone() can have various implementations, it doesn't matter at the API level. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue39511> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
