Message345990
| Author |
steve.dower |
| Recipients |
jdemeyer, ncoghlan, petr.viktorin, scoder, steve.dower, vstinner |
| Date |
2019年06月18日.15:44:03 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1560872644.22.0.596455778202.issue37250@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Don't confuse *ABI* and *API* compatibility. For *API* compatibility, it doesn't matter where we put tp_print.
Don't worry, I'm not. (Though I did blur the lines for the sake of a tongue-in-cheek reply to your comment. Probably shouldn't do that in text with people I haven't spent time with in real life :) )
We're not making any progress here, so perhaps it's time to escalate the decision to the steering council. My read of it:
* Python 3.8 removed a deprecated struct member
* Cython prior to 0.29.10 was writing directly to this member to clear it
* any sdists that include pregenerated Cython modules will fail to build against 3.8
Things to decide (beyond this one-off case):
* are deprecated struct members allowed to be removed in new major version?
* should Cython (using non-stable API) be expected to make updates for new major CPython versions?
* should we treat pre-generated Cython .c files with the same compatibility constraints we use for hand-written C code
My view is yes, yes and no.
* If a field has been deprecated for the normal amount of time and is not in the stable API, it can be removed.
* Cython does not use the stable API, and so should expect to make changes when a new major version of CPython is released
* Pre-generated Cython .c files can be easily regenerated, and given their use of low-level and internal APIs would cause undue compatibility burden on CPython if we were to treat everything it uses as public stable API |
|