On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wednesday,2009-09-09, at 9:43 , Nathan wrote: > >> Does Tahoe-LAFS intend to support pre-2.5 CPython? > > Yes, we support CPython >= 2.4.2 and < 3.0. > > Thank you for the debugging! > > Regards, > > Zooko >
This means all wrapper code has to be hacked up in some manner (again, I haven't discovered what the best definitions are) so that Py_ssize_t is defined in a backwards compatible manner. Actually I'm confused. If we support python < 2.5, then where is Py_ssize_t defined for wrapper code? Is there a backport of the definition? This also means that every cast from Py_ssize_t to something else might be tricky! Maybe what we need is a suite of compiled unit tests that try various casts of Py_ssize_t to detect any subtle platform specific implicit cast errors. Actually, this seems like something the general python community should already have. (/me crosses fingers...) Hm... I'm going to add a "do more research on Py_ssize_t" ticket. _______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://allmydata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
