[Python-Dev] PEP 509

[Victor Stinner]

2016-01-12 19:34 GMT+01:00 Jim J. Jewett <jimjjewett at gmail.com>:
> (1)  Please make it clear within the abstract what counts as a change.

I don't think that an abstract must give the long list of cases when
the version is modified or not. It's explained in detail at:
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0509/#changes

> (1b)  Is there a way to force a version update?

No. Why would you do that? (What is your use case.)

FYI there is a private API in _testcapi to set the version, for unit tests.

> (2)  I would like to see a .get on the guard object, so that it could
> be used in place of the dict lookup even from python.  If this doesn't
> make sense (e.g., doesn't really save time since the guard has to be
> used from python), please mention that in the Guard Example text.

Optimizations are out of the scope of this PEP.

Please see https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0510/ to more examples
of specialization with guards.

See also https://faster-cpython.readthedocs.org/fat_python.html for
concrete optimizations using specialization with guards.

> (3)  It would be possible to define the field as reserved in the main
> header, and require another header to use it even from C.
>
> (3a)  This level of privacy might be overkill, but I would prefer that
> the decision be explicit.
>
> (3b)  The change should almost certainly be hidden from the ABI / Py_LIMITED_API

Oh, the PyDictObject structure is not part of the stable ABI. It seems
worth to mention it in the PEP.

Victor