Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20110406/751eb8ff/attachment.html below:
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 06:10, Jim Jewett <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jimjjewett@gmail.com">jimjjewett@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
On 4/4/11, brett.cannon <<a href="mailto:python-checkins@python.org">python-checkins@python.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> Â Draft of PEP 399: Pure Python/C Accelerator Module Compatibiilty<br>
> Requirements<br>
<br>
> +Abstract<br>
> +========<br>
> +<br>
> +The Python standard library under CPython contains various instances<br>
> +of modules implemented in both pure Python and C. This PEP requires<br>
> +that in these instances that both the Python and C code *must* be<br>
> +semantically identical (except in cases where implementation details<br>
> +of a VM prevents it entirely). It is also required that new C-based<br>
> +modules lacking a pure Python equivalent implementation get special<br>
> +permissions to be added to the standard library.<br>
<br>
I think it is worth stating explicitly that the C version can be even<br>
a strict subset. Â It is OK for the accelerated C code to rely on the<br>
common python version; it is just the reverse that is not OK.<br></blockquote><div><br>I thought that was obvious, but I went ahead and tweaked the abstract and rationale to make this more explicit. <br></div></div>
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