"Ok, now why should _Py_PrintReferences() function be exported?"
It probably shouldn't, but it needs an #ifndef Py_LIMITED_API check so it is
excluded from the headers (my list was automatically generated).
And ideally, private functions that are deliberately exported would have
comments, or if they're new, a version check on Py_LIMITED_API.
Top-posted from my Windows Phone
-----Original Message-----
From: "Victor Stinner" <victor.stin...@gmail.com>
Sent: 12/21/2016 6:25
To: "Serhiy Storchaka" <storch...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Python Dev" <python-dev@python.org>
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Issue #23903 - stable API is incomplete
2016-12-21 14:06 GMT+01:00 Serhiy Storchaka <storch...@gmail.com>:
>> These functions are private. Would it be possible to not export them?
>
> Private functions used in public macros (like _Py_NewReference) should be
> exported.
Ah, _Py_NewReference is used in the PyObject_INIT(op, typeobj) *macro*, right.
IMO it's an issue with our public API: for the stable ABI, we should
replace such macro with a function which hides implementation details.
Example from pystate.h:
#ifdef Py_BUILD_CORE
PyAPI_DATA(_Py_atomic_address) _PyThreadState_Current;
# define PyThreadState_GET() \
((PyThreadState*)_Py_atomic_load_relaxed(&_PyThreadState_Current))
#else
# define PyThreadState_GET() PyThreadState_Get()
#endif
Ok, now why should _Py_PrintReferences() function be exported? This
private function is only called from Py_FinalizeEx(). It is not used
in a macro.
Victor
_______________________________________________
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/steve.dower%40python.org
_______________________________________________
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
