On 28Dec2016 1145, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Tue, 27 Dec 2016 at 12:15 Ronald Oussoren <ronaldousso...@mac.com
<mailto:ronaldousso...@mac.com>> wrote:
A directive would make it easier to ensure that the text about the
stable API is consistent. I’d also consider adding that directive
to all API’s that *are* part of the stable API instead of the other
way around (that would also require changes to …/stable.html). That
would have two advantages: firstly it makes it easier to document
from which version an API is part of the stable ABI, and secondly
forgetting the annotation would imply that an API is not part of the
stable ABI instead of accidentally claiming to increase the stable ABI.
I like Ronald's suggestion of both using a directive and making it for
the stable ABI since it should be an opt-in thing for the API to be
stable instead of opt-out.
The directive is a good idea, but I'm a little concerned about the
stable API being opt-out in the headers and opt-in in the documentation.
Perhaps we should also figure out the preprocessor gymnastics we need to
make it opt-in in the headers too? Though once we get the build
validation to detect when the stable API changes accidentally it'll be
less of an issue.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
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
