On Mon Jul 14 2014 at 11:27:34 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Am 12.07.14 17:19, schrieb Nick Coghlan: > > Using the stable ABI for standard library extensions also serves to > > decouple them further from the internal details of the CPython runtime, > > making it more likely they will be able to run correctly on alternative > > interpreters (since emulating or otherwise supporting the limited API is > > easier than supporting the whole thing). > > There are two features to be gained for the standard library from that > > A. with proper module shutdown support, it will be possible to release > objects that are currently held in C global/static variables, as the > C global variables will go away. This, in turn, is a step forward in > the desire to allow for proper leak-free interpreter shutdown, and > in the desire to base interpreter shutdown on GC. > > B. with proper use of heap types (instead of the static type objects), > support for the multiple-interpreter feature will be improved, since > type objects will be per-interpreter, instead of being global. This, > in turn, is desirable since otherwise state changes can leak from > one interpreter to the other. > > So I still maintain that the change is desirable even for the standard > library. > I agree for PEP 3121 which is the initialization/finalization work. The stable ABi is not necessary. So maybe we should re-examine the patches and accept the bits that clean up init/finalization and leave out any ABi-related changes.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
