On 1/29/07, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I was more generally wondering what the plan was for transitioning any > C API changes (if we were even going to do that level of transition).
It's too early for much of a plan IMO. I'm not making radical changes (yet) but I'm mercilessly deleting APIs as they become obsolete. I expect that we need to wait until we've implemented the new I/O library and the str/unicode unification before we can say much about what to do about C APIs. But there's one thing we can do: not change existing APIs in incompatible ways. If you delete an API, code that uses it gets a compile-time error, and that should make it relatively simple to fix (assuming there's a replacement). But if you change the signature it's more questionable, and if you change the semantics (e.g. returning a different kind of PyObject*) it's painful. So let's commit to not changing signatures or semantics, but delete obsolete APIs in favor of new ones (with a different name). I guess this means some of the new names will be ugly. So what, it's C. :-) -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
