Marc-Andre Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> added the comment: Martin v. Löwis wrote: > > Martin v. Löwis <mar...@v.loewis.de> added the comment: > > I propose a different approach: > > 1. add a flag to PyModuleDef, indicating whether the module was built in > UCS-2 or UCS-4 mode. Then let the interpreter refuse the load the module, > instead of having the dynamic linker do so. > 2. provide a mode for the header files where Py_UNICODE is not defined. add > another flag to PyModuleDef indicating whether that mode was used when > compiling the extension. > > Module authors then can make a choice whether or not to refer to the Unicode > internal representation in their module. If they do, a UCS-2 version won't > load into a UCS-4 interpreter. If they don't refer to Py_UNICODE at all, the > module can be used across the two modes. > > There is a slight risk that a module may already crash before calling > PyModule_Create. To prevent that, we need to specify that no Unicode API must > be used before calling PyModule_Create.
+1 We could then get rid off the API renaming altogether. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8654> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
