On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:52:53 +0200 Victor Stinner <vstin...@python.org> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:03 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > If the HPy design is the long term goal, why not just recommend that > > people use HPy? And keep the C API for expert users with specific > > needs that are not accomodated by HPy. > > > > To me, it seems that trying to change the C API to be "like HPy" is > > creating a lot of work, churn and pain for little gain. > > If you put HPy aside, "Fixing" the C API has multiple advantages for > CPython and its (C API) users.
With the caveat that the "fixing" probably requires users to fix their packages as well. > For consumers of the C API (C extensions, Cython, pybind11, etc.), > once most implementation details will be hidden, the C API will become > way more stable. The *API* is quite stable already if you don't use the private/internal functions. Perhaps you're thinking about the ABI? > > (and, yes, perhaps HPy needs to be funded or supported by the PSF if it > > doesn't advance fast enough) > > What can be done in practice for that? If I understood correctly, > Oracle is sponsoring the project since they want to use HPy for > GraalPython (of their GraalVM). Also, Anaconda recently hired Antonio Cuni, hopefully giving him sufficient time to work on HPy. So perhaps nothing needs to be done in practice. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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/QKWLX5223UD2ZCDYJLRDEXISFVFYWU7P/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
