Eddie Elizondo <eduardo.elizondoru...@gmail.com> added the comment:
@ronaldoussoren Please read the complete analysis from the mailing list: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2018-August/154946.html. The description here was just a rehash and I probably missed some context. Particularly, when I said: "PyTypeObject's ob_type should always be set by PyType_Ready" I was referring to the PyTypeObject's that are statically set in C code. Metatypes explicitly have to set the ob_type and that's already handled. In the current state of things, you have static PyTypeObjects that are being used before calling PyType_Ready due to this macro. This change just standardizes the header of static PyTypeObject throughout the entire codebase. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34522> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
