On 25. 03. 21 9:49, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le 25/03/2021 à 01:00, Nick Coghlan a écrit :
Thanks Peter, that's a good clarification.
Simon's email about a possible future HPy backend for Cython also reminded me about a detail of the way pysip and cffi support the stable ABI: the modules built with those tools are abi3 compatible, but the support modules that the tools publish to PyPI are *not* abi3 compatible.
Does it mean that ABI stability of a module built with pysip / cffi then depends on the ABI stability of the "support modules" published by pysip and cffi?
I understand that this allows to decouple of evolution of the stable ABI from Python versioning, is that right?
Not really. As far as I understand it, the support modules wrap things that are not available in the stable ABI (yet), are too expensive for some use case without the full API.
Though I've mostly looked at from "Qt for Python"/PySide, not pysip/cffi