[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 689 – Semi-stable C API tier

2022年4月29日 10:31:56 -0700

On 2022年04月29日 18:02, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:15 AM Petr Viktorin <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
 On 29. 04. 22 16:32, Victor Stinner wrote:
 > Ok, let me start with the serious business: API name.
 >
 > I'm not comfortable with "semi-stable". Python already has a "limited
 > API" and a "stable ABI". Just by its name, it's unclear what
 > "semi-stable" means.
 >
 > Honestly, I would be more comfortable with the name: "unstable API".
 > It would be clear that the API *can* change often. People who want to
 > know exactly the backward compatibility warranties can dig into the
 > API documentation to learn more about it.
 >
 > "Unstable API" is also the name the Guido proposed for
 PyCode_New() last year:
 >
 > * Proposal: declare "unstable APIs"
 >
 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/JM6SQ2YNMDAKXYD5O54QWMVR2X7QOXVL/
 
<https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/JM6SQ2YNMDAKXYD5O54QWMVR2X7QOXVL/>
 > * Making code object APIs unstable
 >
 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/ZWTBR5ESYR26BUIVMXOKPFRLGGYDJSFC/
 
<https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/ZWTBR5ESYR26BUIVMXOKPFRLGGYDJSFC/>
 >
 > Victor
 Nick Coghlan argued against that term:
 > "unstable" is the wrong term. We already have an unstable API
 tier: the
 > internal API, which can change even in maintenance releases. The
 value of
 > the new tier is that it is "semi stable": stable in maintenance
 releases,
 > unstable in feature releases.
 —
 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/CTKKTHUV5R2A2RRN5DM32UQFNC42DDGJ/
 
<https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/CTKKTHUV5R2A2RRN5DM32UQFNC42DDGJ/>
 But I also like "unstable" better than "semi-stable". Splitting the
 internals into "private"/"internal" and "unstable" seems reasonable.
I think picking "semi-stable" would be giving in to the OCD nerd in all of us. :-) While perhaps technically less precise, "unstable" is the catchy name with the right association. (And yes, we should keep it stable within bugfix releases, but the name doesn't need to reflect that detail.) The "internal API" isn't an API at all (except for CPython core developers and contributors). The "unstable API" would definitely be an *API* for users outside the core.
So let's please go with "unstable".
I was going to suggest "metastable". Too late? :-)
_______________________________________________
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/5B7ES3BZJTKORNCT6LWLRHM7UNSFCKYU/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to