2016-01-12 19:34 GMT+01:00 Jim J. Jewett <jimjjew...@gmail.com>: > (1) Please make it clear within the abstract what counts as a change.
I don't think that an abstract must give the long list of cases when the version is modified or not. It's explained in detail at: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0509/#changes > (1b) Is there a way to force a version update? No. Why would you do that? (What is your use case.) FYI there is a private API in _testcapi to set the version, for unit tests. > (2) I would like to see a .get on the guard object, so that it could > be used in place of the dict lookup even from python. If this doesn't > make sense (e.g., doesn't really save time since the guard has to be > used from python), please mention that in the Guard Example text. Optimizations are out of the scope of this PEP. Please see https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0510/ to more examples of specialization with guards. See also https://faster-cpython.readthedocs.org/fat_python.html for concrete optimizations using specialization with guards. > (3) It would be possible to define the field as reserved in the main > header, and require another header to use it even from C. > > (3a) This level of privacy might be overkill, but I would prefer that > the decision be explicit. > > (3b) The change should almost certainly be hidden from the ABI / > Py_LIMITED_API Oh, the PyDictObject structure is not part of the stable ABI. It seems worth to mention it in the PEP. Victor _______________________________________________ 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