Message273339
| Author |
vstinner |
| Recipients |
scoder, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner |
| Date |
2016年08月22日.08:06:46 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1471853206.21.0.473371101558.issue27810@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> There is a tiny bit of a backwards compatibility concern as the new function signature would be incompatible with anything we had before,
Right. If you call directly PyCFunction functions, you will likely get quickly a crash. But... who call directly PyCFunction functions? Why not using the 30+ functions to call functions?
Hopefully, it's easy to support METH_FASTCALL in an existing function getting a tuple:
int nargs = (int)PyTuple_GET_SIZE(args);
PyObject **stack = &PyTuple_GETITEM(args, 0);
result = func(self, stack, nargs, kwargs);
I guess that Cython calls directly PyCFunction. cpyext module of PyPy probably too. Ok, except of them, are you aware of other projects doing that? |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2016年08月22日 08:06:46 | vstinner | set | recipients:
+ vstinner, scoder, serhiy.storchaka |
| 2016年08月22日 08:06:46 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1471853206.21.0.473371101558.issue27810@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016年08月22日 08:06:46 | vstinner | link | issue27810 messages |
| 2016年08月22日 08:06:46 | vstinner | create |
|