Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
> As it has been mentioned there is no guarantee that your variable will even
> be finalized (or even destroyed) after the frame finishes. For example, if
> your variable goes into a reference cycle for whatever reason it may not be
> cleared until a GC run happens
Dennis Sweeney wrote:
> I don't know if there's anything specifically stopping this, but from what I
> understand, the precise moment that a finalizer gets called is unspecified,
> so relying on any sort of behavior there is undefined and non-portable.
> Implementations like PyPy don't always
> Not for me to answer, I'm not a proponent of the change. I'm sure if
> you read past discussions here and on Discourse you'll find answers
> from the people who studied the problem carefully.
The opening mail proposed C++11 without rationale or references. I did search
the archives and
As it has been mentioned there is no guarantee that your variable will even
be finalized (or even destroyed) after the frame finishes. For example, if
your variable goes into a reference cycle for whatever reason it may not be
cleared until a GC run happens (and in some situations it may not even
> I work on Apache Arrow, where the C++ parts require C++11 (and we can't
go further than this for now because of R compatibility concerns).
Thanks for the datapoint, that's reasonable of course (though I'll note you're
using abseil at least through grpc, and abseil is scheduled to remove C++11
I don't know if there's anything specifically stopping this, but from what I
understand, the precise moment that a finalizer gets called is unspecified, so
relying on any sort of behavior there is undefined and non-portable.
Implementations like PyPy don't always use reference counting, so
Consider this example code:
def test():
a = A()
test()
Currently, the locals (i.e. `a`) are cleared only after the function
has returned:
If we attach a finalizer to `a` immediately after the declaration then
the frame stack available via `sys._getframe()` inside the finalizer
function
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 17:52:40 +0200
Victor Stinner wrote:
> Recently, a issue about C++20 compatibility was reported:
>
> "The Python library will not compile with a C++2020 compiler because
> the code uses the reserved “module” keyword"
> https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/83536
>
> In
Recently, a issue about C++20 compatibility was reported:
"The Python library will not compile with a C++2020 compiler because
the code uses the reserved “module” keyword"
https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/83536
In fact, after a long study, Python C API is *not* affected by this
issue.
As a data point, I don't remember that recent versions of CPython
brought any particular pain for PyArrow, which is a set of bindings
written in Cython around some C++ core library code.
Regards
Antoine.
On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 18:31:13 +0200
Victor Stinner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If you got issues
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 22:03:25 +0900
"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
> h.vetin...@gmx.com writes:
>
> > While I don't know who proposed C++11 or where, I'd therefore like
> > to propose to move to _at least_ C++14.
>
> What benefits does this have for Python development?
Let me second that
Since we are you talking about tests, we can easily run the tests on
multiple C++ versions. But we have to start somewhere, so I propose to
start with C++11. More C++ versions can be tested later.
Victor
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 5:54 AM wrote:
>
> > In terms of C++ version, it was proposed to
h.vetin...@gmx.com writes:
> > > While I don't know who proposed C++11 or where, I'd therefore like
> > > to propose to move to _at least_ C++14.
> >
> > What benefits does this have for Python development?
>
> Likewise I can ask what benefits choosing C++11 would have?
Not for me to
> > While I don't know who proposed C++11 or where, I'd therefore like
> > to propose to move to _at least_ C++14.
>
> What benefits does this have for Python development?
Likewise I can ask what benefits choosing C++11 would have?
In general, I think standards and compilers need version
h.vetin...@gmx.com writes:
> While I don't know who proposed C++11 or where, I'd therefore like
> to propose to move to _at least_ C++14.
What benefits does this have for Python development?
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To
15 matches
Mail list logo
