On 14 July 2017 at 02:29, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 at 09:12 Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>> I don’t understand. Moving too functions instead of macros for some thing
>> doesn’t really help with keeping the public API stable (for the non-stable
On 14 July 2017 at 01:35, Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2017-07-13 15:21 GMT+02:00 Nick Coghlan :
>> As far as I know, this isn't really why folks find the stable ABI hard
>> to switch to. Rather, I believe it's because switching to the stable
>> ABI means
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 at 09:12 Ronald Oussoren wrote:
> On 12 Jul 2017, at 20:51, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 at 01:25 Ronald Oussoren
> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On 11 Jul 2017, at 12:19, Victor Stinner
2017-07-13 15:21 GMT+02:00 Nick Coghlan :
> As far as I know, this isn't really why folks find the stable ABI hard
> to switch to. Rather, I believe it's because switching to the stable
> ABI means completely changing how you define classes to be closer to
> the way you define
On 13 July 2017 at 21:46, Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2017-07-12 20:51 GMT+02:00 Brett Cannon :
>> I think Victor has long-term plans to try and hide the struct details at a
>> higher-level and so that would make macros a bad thing. But ignoring the
>>
2017-07-12 20:51 GMT+02:00 Brett Cannon :
> I also think the motivation doesn't have to be performance but simply
> cleaning up how we expose our C APIs to users as shown by the fact we have
> messed up the stable API by making it opt-out instead of opt-in.
It's hard to sell a
On 13 July 2017 at 08:23, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> The general rule of thumb in Cython core development is that it's ok to
> exploit internals as long as there is a generic fallback through some C-API
> operations which can be used in other Python implementations. I'd be happy
Victor Stinner schrieb am 11.07.2017 um 12:19:
> Split the ``Include/`` directory of CPython:
>
> * ``python`` API: ``Include/Python.h`` remains the default C API
> * ``core`` API: ``Include/core/Python.h`` is a new C API designed for
> building Python
> * ``stable`` API:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 at 01:25 Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> > On 11 Jul 2017, at 12:19, Victor Stinner
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is the first draft of a big (?) project to prepare CPython to be
> > able to "modernize" its implementation.
> On 11 Jul 2017, at 12:19, Victor Stinner wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This is the first draft of a big (?) project to prepare CPython to be
> able to "modernize" its implementation. Proposed changes should allow
> to make CPython more efficient in the future. The
On 7/11/2017 11:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Commenting more on specific technical details rather than just tone this time :)
On 11 July 2017 at 20:19, Victor Stinner wrote:
Reference counting may be emulated in a future implementation for
backward compatibility.
> Step 3: first pass of implementation detail removal
> ---
>
> Modify the ``python`` API:
>
> * Add a new ``API`` subdirectory in the Python source code which will
> "implement" the Python C API
> * Replace macros with functions. The
On 11 July 2017 at 11:19, Victor Stinner wrote:
> XXX should we abandon the stable ABI? Never really used by anyone.
Please don't. On Windows, embedding Python is a pain because a new
version of Python requires a recompile (which isn't ideal for apps
that just want to
13 matches
Mail list logo