On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 3:34 PM Steve Dower <steve.do...@python.org> wrote: > On 16Feb.2019 1332, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > This sounds like a reasonable design principle: decree the API > > non-stable and prone to breakage (it already is, anyway), don't hide it. > > As I was chatting with Eric shortly before he posted this, I assume the > idea would be to expose anything useful/necessary via a function. That > at least removes the struct layout from the ABI, without removing > functionality. > > > It's true that in the PyInterpreterState case specifically, there > > doesn't seem much worthy of use by third-party libraries. > > Which seems to suggest that the answer to "which members are important > to expose?" is "probably none". And that's possibly why Eric didn't > mention it in his email :) > > This is mostly about being able to assign blame when things break, so > I'm totally okay with extension modules that want to play with internals > declaring Py_BUILD_CORE to get access to them (though I suspect that > won't work out of the box - maybe we should have a > Py_I_TOO_LIKE_TO_LIVE_DANGEROUSLY?). > > I like that we're taking (small) steps to reduce the size of our API. It > helps balance out the growth and leaves us with a chance of one day > being able to have an extension model that isn't as tied to C's ABI.
Yeah, what Steve said. :) -eric _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
