Message 345343 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub , and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

In-reply-to
Author	vstinner
Recipients	jdemeyer, vstinner
Date	2019年06月12日.13:24:21
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<1560345861.7.0.756637759891.issue37250@roundup.psfhosted.org>

Content
IMHO the simplest and safest option for this issue is to revert tp_print removal and move tp_vectorcall_offset at the end of PyTypeObject. Is PEP 590 fully public in Python 3.8? It seems like _Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_VECTORCALL at least is private. Maybe we can attempt again to remove tp_print from Python 3.9? Once Cython will handle tp_print removal? Or even keep it in Python 3.9? Python 3 had unused tp_print for 10 years and nobody complained. There are a few PyTypeObject instances in a Python process. A single pointer isn't a giant waste of memory.

Content

IMHO the simplest and safest option for this issue is to revert tp_print removal and move tp_vectorcall_offset at the end of PyTypeObject.
Is PEP 590 fully public in Python 3.8? It seems like _Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_VECTORCALL at least is private.
Maybe we can attempt again to remove tp_print from Python 3.9? Once Cython will handle tp_print removal? Or even keep it in Python 3.9?
Python 3 had unused tp_print for 10 years and nobody complained. There are a few PyTypeObject instances in a Python process. A single pointer isn't a giant waste of memory.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2019年06月12日 13:24:21	vstinner	set	recipients: + vstinner, jdemeyer
2019年06月12日 13:24:21	vstinner	set	messageid: <1560345861.7.0.756637759891.issue37250@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2019年06月12日 13:24:21	vstinner	link	issue37250 messages
2019年06月12日 13:24:21	vstinner	create

homepage