Pablo Galindo Salgado <pablog...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> It is very little effort to add back the old function, so that isn't the > problem. It won't work properly, but it never did anyway. So I guess that's > sort of compatible. It won't work properly is an incompatible change. Before, if you extract all fields from a code object and pass it down to the constructor, everything will work. > Maybe the best thing is to put a big red warning in the docs and hope that > warns away people from using it? I think code object constructors must be part of the private CAPI due to what we are experiencing. But again, this is something we cannot decide on this bpo issue. Either a python-dev thread needs to be open or a Steering Council request in the https://github.com/python/steering-council repo needs to be opened. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue40222> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
