A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-October/113833.html below:

[Python-Dev] Using PEP384 Stable ABI for the lzma extension module

[Python-Dev] Using PEP384 Stable ABI for the lzma extension module [Python-Dev] Using PEP384 Stable ABI for the lzma extension moduleNick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Tue Oct 4 19:10:36 CEST 2011
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's probably not a bad idea, otherwise we may compilation without
> realising it.

s/may/may break/

Actually testing the ABI stability would be much harder - somehow
building an extension module against 3.2 with the limited API then
testing it against a freshly built 3.3. Perhaps we could manage
something like that by building against a system installation of
Python 3.2 on builders that have it available.

All in all, I think PEP 384 laid the foundations, but there's still
plenty of work to be done in the documentation and testing space (and
perhaps a few API additions) before the majority of extensions can
realistically switch to the stable ABI. A bit of "eating our own
dogfood" in the extension modules we ship may be a good place to start
(especially new ones that are added).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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