<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:40 AM, Matthias Klose <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:doko@ubuntu.com" target="_blank">doko@ubuntu.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div> 2) As PEP 3147 defines a non-configurable name for .pyc files, this PEP</div>
should define a non-configurable way for the tag. The tag should<br>
include all information which currently makes an extension ABI<br>
incompatible:<br>
- the python implementation (cpython, PyPy, ...)<br>
- the python version (3,2, 3.3, ...)<br>
- unicode configure option (--with-wide-unicode, 16 or 32)<br>
- platform information (necessary?)</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm not sure it's that easy to enumerate all of the ways to end up with an incompatible ABI. There are quite a lot of configure options listed with "configure --help", and it's not always obvious if an option changes the ABI. On top of that, there are compilation flags that can change the ABI, as Kristján discovered in the following thread:</div>
<div><br></div><div><a href="http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-June/100583.html">http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-June/100583.html</a></div><div><br></div><div>On the flip side, a fully enumerated ABI signature could be used to identify (in)compatible binary eggs, which is basically impossible now.</div>
</div><div name="sig_2341e11ee1" style="margin-top: 2em; margin-right: 0pt; margin-bottom: 2em; margin-left: 0pt; ">--<br>
Daniel Stutzbach, Ph.D.<br>
President, <a href="http://stutzbachenterprises.com">Stutzbach Enterprises, LLC</a>
</div><br>