On 21 June 2013 17:25, Victor Stinner <victor.stin...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2013/6/21 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com>: >> Because practicality beats purity. This "wrong" Python code has been >> good enough for all Python version up until 3.4, it makes sense to >> keep it as a fallback instead of throwing it away. > > How do you plan to handle the following case in Python? > > "Looking in more detail: for the S_IFMT flags, OSX/Darwin/FreeBSD defines > 0xe000 as S_IFWHT (whiteout), but Solaris defines it as > S_IFPORT (event port)." > > We may keep the Python module if it is kept unchanged, but the Python > and C modules should have the same public API (the C module should not > have more features).
I think it's OK to expose additional platform specific features in the C version, and have them fail cleanly with the pure Python version (rather than silently giving the wrong answer). What's not OK is for the standard library to regress for other implementations just because we added a C implementation for the benefit of CPython. That's exactly the kind of thing PEP 399 says we *won't* do. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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
