On Jan 20, 2010, at 11:05 PM, Jack Diederich wrote: >Does disabling the LLVM change binary compatibility between modules >targeted at the same version? At tonight's Boston PIG we had some >binary package maintainers but most people (including myself) only >cared about source compatibility. I assume linux distros care about >binary compatibility _a lot_.
A few questions come to mind: 1. What are the implications for PEP 384 (Stable ABI) if U-S is added? 2. What effect does requiring C++ have on the embedded applications across the set of platforms that Python is currently compatible on? In a previous life I had to integrate a C++ library with Python as an embedded language and had lots of problems on some OSes (IIRC Solaris and Windows) getting all the necessary components to link properly. 3. Will the U-S bits come with a roadmap to the code? It seems like this is dropping a big black box of code on the Python developers, and I would want to reduce the learning curve as much as possible. I'm generally +0 with the current performance improvements, I could certainly be +1 if we get even more gains out of it. I think there's a lot of issues that need to be addressed, and the PEP process is the right way to do that. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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
