On 09/02/2011 14:00, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2011/2/9 Mark Shannon<ma...@dcs.gla.ac.uk>:
OK, so UnicodeError_xxx is important for codecs, but surely this sort of
argument could be made for lots of things.
Don't forget that for each function added to the API,
all other implementations have to support it forever.
The C-API is about the biggest implementation detail of CPython, so
no, they don't have to.
Alternative implementations that want C extensions to work (like
Ironclad for IronPython and cpyext for pypy) do implement the parts of
the C API that are most widely used though. Of course they don't *have
to*, but c extension compatibility is one of the biggest problems for
users of alternative implementations.
Hopefully the stable ABI will improve this situation for the future, but
realistically its going to be a few years before it has an appreciable
effect.
Michael
Unfortunately, UnicodeError_xxx are not the only new functions.
Various others have been added:
int Py_EnterRecursiveCall(char *where)
void Py_LeaveRecursiveCall()
int Py_ReprEnter(PyObject *object)
void Py_ReprLeave(PyObject *object)
HotPyModule_GetFilenameObject
HotPy_CompileStringExFlags
and a few others.
Individual functions are not the problem,
I'm sure all of these can be justified,
its lack of process and review that bothers me.
If they can be justified, what is the process lacking?
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
_______________________________________________
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
