On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 11:50 AM Gregory P. Smith <g...@krypto.org> wrote: > > I've heard that libraries using ctypes, cffi, or cython code of various sorts > in the real world wild today does abuse the unfortunate side effect of > CPython's implementation of id(). I don't have specific instances of this in > mind but trust what I've heard: that it is happening. > > id() should never be considered to be the PyObject*. In as much as code > shouldn't assume it is running on top of a specific CPython implementation. > If there is a _need_ to get a pointer to a C struct handle referencing a > CPython C API PyObject, we should make an explicit API for that rather than > the id() hack. That way code can be explicit about its need, and code that > is just doing a funky form of identity tracking without using is and is not > can continue using id() without triggering regressive behavior on VMs that > don't have a CPython compatible PyObject under the hood by default. >
I would be strongly in favour of ctypes gaining a "get address of object" function, which happens (in current CPythons) to return the same value as id() does, but is specifically tied to ctypes. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
