Mark Dickinson wrote: > On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 9:28 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: > >> tp_reserved sounds fine. In 3.0.1, filling it with a function pointer >> should give no error, since that would be a binary-incompatible change. > > I'm not sure I understand you here. Are you saying that in your > opinion it is safe to change the type of tp_reserved > from (cmpfunc *) to some other (dummy) function pointer?
No. I thought someone (you?) proposed that it should cause a runtime error if a type definitions fills the tp_compare slot. I say that 3.0.1 must not produce such an error. > I now realize (thanks to your message) that changing the type > to (void *) isn't entirely safe, since sizeof(void*) may be > different from sizeof(cmpfunc*) on some platforms. Do you know of a platform where this is actually the case? I wouldn't mind making that an #error (i.e. having it fail at compile time already). Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
