A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-March/022050.html below:

[Python-Dev] Moving forward on the object memory API

[Python-Dev] Moving forward on the object memory API [Python-Dev] Moving forward on the object memory APITim Peters tim.one@comcast.net
Sun, 31 Mar 2002 18:13:17 -0500
[martin@v.loewis.de]
> The third part is easy to answer. If it is deprecated, and used in the
> core or an extension, that use must be removed. Neal is really good at
> removing deprecated usage :-)

This is too easy of an answer, as the docs *already* make such distinctions.
Read the tail end of the PyMem_ docs (PyMem_UPPERCASE is supposedly already
deprecated, but only in extension modules).

> ...
> That will be interesting to extension authors. If they are think they
> can get performance from using a macro, they will use the macro.

Even if it doesn't guarantee binary compatibility?  They really can't tell
from the docs now; I want us to finally answer such questions.

> If C code shouldn't care, we needed only half of them.

If you ask me, we didn't need more than a fourth of them <wink>.




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