[Tim, to Oren] > It would help if you could get Marc-Andre and /F to pronounce on whether > their code benefits from it -- they're the most prolific extension > authors we've got. [/F] > no problem here, from what I can tell. we can live with or > without this change. Note that there are (at least) two parts to Oren's agenda: 1. Removing the possibility for indirect interning. 2. Making interned strings mortal, via the usual refcount rules. In context, I was asking only about #1, and I'm sure your reply was meant to include #1. What I remain unclear about is whether you've also got no fear of #2. I'm also wondering whether we somehow broke indirect interning since it was introduced -- so far nobody has found a program or extension module where it even triggers (not counting the 6 instances in the Python test suite in intern-in-place, since no use of the indirect interning was made in those cases).
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4