On 3/30/2022 4:42 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
In the not so distant past I have proposed to introduce a new category,
"Unstable APIs". These are public but are not guaranteed to be backwards
compatible in feature releases (though I feel they should remain so in
bugfix releases).
Agreed. This is definitely a new category, and it seems the only thing
we're debating now is whether or not to add/omit the underscore.
I'm not sure whether those should have a leading underscore or not.
Perhaps (like some other languages do and like maybe we've used in a few
places) the name could just include the word "Unstable"?
I don't think we have "Unstable" anywhere, though we do have "Unsafe"
(which is more about threading than stability, so not right for this).
But I'd be okay with that as a compromise.
I'd prefer to not have public-unstable APIs hidden behind the same
preprocessor directive as internal APIs. That's a big switch to throw
that may also activate other settings - for example, on Windows we will
set the minimum Windows version in our headers if you enable internal
APIs, and disable automatic linking of the Python DLL. Easy enough
things to work around, but they probably need to be explicitly
documented as well if we're going to document public APIs as requiring
Py_BUILD_CORE (and I don't want to have to document that kind of stuff).
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ZEPJSIJNXQKXTOE2MRNS6GJRP52WLDEF/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/