On 14 Jul 2014 11:41, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
I agree for PEP 3121 which is the initialization/finalization work. The
stable ABi is not necessary. So maybe we should re-examine the patches and
accept the bits that clean up init/finalization and leave out any
ABi-related changes.
Am 12.07.14 17:19, schrieb Nick Coghlan:
Using the stable ABI for standard library extensions also serves to
decouple them further from the internal details of the CPython runtime,
making it more likely they will be able to run correctly on alternative
interpreters (since emulating or
On Mon Jul 14 2014 at 11:27:34 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de
wrote:
Am 12.07.14 17:19, schrieb Nick Coghlan:
Using the stable ABI for standard library extensions also serves to
decouple them further from the internal details of the CPython runtime,
making it more likely they will
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
So maybe we should re-examine the patches and accept the bits that clean
up init/finalization and leave out any ABI-related changes.
This is precisely what I suggested two years ago.
On 10 Jul 2014 19:59, Alexander Belopolsky alexander.belopol...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
I'm just curious as to why there are 54 open issues after both of these
PEPs have been accepted and 384 is listed as finished. Did we
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
The main downside of do as we say, not as we do in this case is that we
miss out on the feedback loop of what the stable ABI is like to *use*.
I good start for improving the situation would be to convert the extension
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
No, the PEPs were fine and were accepted properly. A huge portion of the open
issues are from Robin Schreiber who as part of GSoC 2012 -- https://
www.google-melange.com/gsoc/project/details/google/gsoc2012/robin_hood/
5668600916475904 -- went through and
I'm just curious as to why there are 54 open issues after both of these
PEPs have been accepted and 384 is listed as finished. Did we hit some
unforeseen technical problem which stalled development?
For these and any other open issues if you need some Windows testing
doing please feel free
[for those that don't know, 3121 is extension module inti/finalization and
384 is the stable ABI]
On Thu Jul 10 2014 at 3:47:03 PM, Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
I'm just curious as to why there are 54 open issues after both of these
PEPs have been accepted and 384 is listed as
I don't know the details, but I suspect that was the result of my general
guideline don't start projects cleaning up lots of stdlib code just to
satisfy some new style rule or just to use a new API -- which came from
hard-won experience where such a cleanup project introduced some new bugs
that
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
I'm just curious as to why there are 54 open issues after both of these
PEPs have been accepted and 384 is listed as finished. Did we hit some
unforeseen technical problem which stalled development?
I tried to
On 07/10/2014 04:57 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
I'm just curious as to why there are 54 open issues after both of
these PEPs have been accepted and 384 is listed as finished. Did
we hit some unforeseen technical problem which stalled
12 matches
Mail list logo
