[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 1:56 AM Petr Viktorin wrote: > It's possible to remove them just like _PyObject_GC_Malloc was removed, > but check that it was unusable (e.g. not called from public macros) in > all versions of Python from 3.2 up to now. That's what I expected. Thanks. > Could you check

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On 08. 12. 21 18:06, Eric Snow wrote: On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 2:23 AM Petr Viktorin wrote: That really depends on what function we'd want to remove. There are usually alternatives to deleting things, but the options depend on the function. If we run out of other options we can make the function

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 2:23 AM Petr Viktorin wrote: > That really depends on what function we'd want to remove. There are > usually alternatives to deleting things, but the options depend on the > function. If we run out of other options we can make the function always > fail or make it leak

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 12:42, Petr Viktorin wrote: > > I assume it would be insensitive to ask whether we could just get rid of > > the stable ABI altogether and focus on the limited API? Just tell > > everyone they have to rebuild binary wheels for every Python feature > > release. Presumably the

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On 07. 12. 21 19:28, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 12:58 AM Petr Viktorin > wrote: On 06. 12. 21 21:50, Guido van Rossum wrote: [...] > Also, it looks like Mark is proposing to *remove* _PyObject_GC_Malloc > from stable_abi.txt in

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On 07. 12. 21 20:58, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 11:02 AM Christian Heimes > wrote: On 07/12/2021 19.28, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I assume it would be insensitive to ask whether we could just get rid of > the stable ABI

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 11:02 AM Christian Heimes wrote: > On 07/12/2021 19.28, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I assume it would be insensitive to ask whether we could just get rid of > > the stable ABI altogether and focus on the limited API? Just tell > > everyone they have to rebuild binary

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On 07/12/2021 19.28, Guido van Rossum wrote: I assume it would be insensitive to ask whether we could just get rid of the stable ABI altogether and focus on the limited API? Just tell everyone they have to rebuild binary wheels for every Python feature release. Presumably the deprecation of

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 12:58 AM Petr Viktorin wrote: > On 06. 12. 21 21:50, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 12:12 PM Petr Viktorin > > wrote: > > > > On 06. 12. 21 20:29, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > Hi Petr, > > > > > > In PEP

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On 06. 12. 21 21:50, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 12:12 PM Petr Viktorin > wrote: On 06. 12. 21 20:29, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Hi Petr, > > In PEP 384 it is written that no functions starting with an underscore > are part

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:54 PM Guido van Rossum wrote: > Also, it looks like Mark is proposing to *remove* _PyObject_GC_Malloc from > stable_abi.txt In Python 3.2, _PyObject_GC_Malloc() is implemented as a function. PyObject_GC_New() macro calls _PyObject_GC_New() function. Internally,

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 12:12 PM Petr Viktorin wrote: > On 06. 12. 21 20:29, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > Hi Petr, > > > > In PEP 384 it is written that no functions starting with an underscore > > are part of the stable ABI: > > > > PEP 384 -- Defining a Stable ABI | Python.org > >

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification regarding Stable ABI and _Py_*

On 06. 12. 21 20:29, Guido van Rossum wrote: Hi Petr, In PEP 384 it is written that no functions starting with an underscore are part of the stable ABI: PEP 384 -- Defining a Stable ABI | Python.org > All functions starting