On 02/03/2014 07:08 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
For source compatibility, yes. But I thought the point of the binary ABI was to allow compiling a single extension that worked unmodified with multiple versions of Python. If we simply don't support that, then an ifdef would be fine.On Feb 03, 2014, at 06:43 AM, Larry Hastings wrote:But that only fixes part of the problem. Our theoretical extension that wants to be binary-compatible with 3.3 and 3.4 still has a problem: how can they support signatures? They can't give PyMethodDefEx structures to 3.3, it will blow up. But if they don't use PyMethodDefEx, they can't have signatures.Can't an extension writer #ifdef around this? Yeah, it's ugly, but it's a pretty standard approach for making C extensions multi-version compatible.
//arry/
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com