On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 1:33 PM Victor Stinner <vstin...@python.org> wrote:
> Hi Guido, > > It seems like you are talking about the Python API. > Primarily, yes. In the C API, there is the internal C API which fits with your > description. To access it, you have to declare the > Py_BUILD_CORE_MODULE macro. It's not usable directly on purpose. It's > an user agreement: I know what I am doing, and I know that this API is > not supported nor stable. > Hm, but aren't for example all the fields of code objects (co_name, co_argcount, etc.) in the "non-internal" API? Those (and the functions that manipulate code objects) are a prime example of what I'd consider "unstable". On https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/code.html it already says about the fields "The fields of this type are subject to change at any time." But I think everything else on that page should be considered unstable as well. (And why do we even have PyCode_GetNumFree()?) > I don't know if there would be a way to advertise that a Python API is > unstable. Some projects use an underscore prefix in their module names > to mark them as "private". For example, sub-modules of a package are > called "_something.py" and they exposed in package/__init__.py (or > another public module). > I was primarily thinking of the docs. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/U3TMLYUPDWJAUKOMLS4BRMMNPOEHSQAT/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
