RetroSearch Browse

Sat Oct 12 21:57:29 CEST 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-October/129485.html

12.10.13 22:19, Georg Brandl написав(ла):
> Am 12.10.2013 20:20, schrieb Serhiy Storchaka:
>> 12.10.13 21:04, Georg Brandl написав(ла):
>>> in light of the recent thread about PEPs not forming part of the docs,
>>> I've just pushed a change that allows to document C API elements
>>> not part of the limited API as such.  It is done like this:
>>>
>>> ... c:function:: int _PyTuple_Resize(PyObject **p, Py_ssize_t newsize)
>>>      :notlimited:
>>>
>>> I have not yet begun adding these to the documents; if someone wants to
>>> help with this I am glad for volunteers.
>>
>> Why this is needed? The limited API is unstable and only developers of
>> CPython can use it (but they can look in headers).
>
> Well, I may be reading PEP 384 wrongly, but the point is exactly to have a
> *stable* API for *non-core* developers to rely upon, so that they can build
> extensions that don't need to be recompiled for every version of Python.

Sorry, I meant notlimited API. It can vary from version to version and 
can disappear. For example _PyUnicodeWriter was changed many times (and 
I suppose it will be changed many times).

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-October/129485.html below:

[Python-Dev] Support for marking limited API elements in C API docs