adding _Py prefix to names in 2.5.1?
http://python.org/sf/1637022 points out a problem caused by the lack of a _Py prefix on Ellipsis. Most (all?) of the new AST names are not prefixed. These are all meant to be internal names. Are there any issues with changing this? If we do so, it means that any module built with 2.5 that is using these names will fail to work in 2.5.1. No code outside the core *should* be using these names. Assuming there is no dissent, does some budding Python developer want to take on a patch? This should be pretty straightforward. Feel free to mail me off list if you prefer. Cheers, n
On 1/16/07, Neal Norwitz
http://python.org/sf/1637022 points out a problem caused by the lack of a _Py prefix on Ellipsis. Most (all?) of the new AST names are not prefixed. These are all meant to be internal names. Are there any issues with changing this? If we do so, it means that any module built with 2.5 that is using these names will fail to work in 2.5.1. No code outside the core *should* be using these names.
It makes me terribly uncomfortable, as removing symbols is absolutely not
something that should happen in a bugfix release, but I think that, in this
case, it is the right thing to do. Well, the least-wrong thing to do. If
only C had more visibility control, sigh ;-P
--
Thomas Wouters
Neal Norwitz schrieb:
http://python.org/sf/1637022 points out a problem caused by the lack of a _Py prefix on Ellipsis. Most (all?) of the new AST names are not prefixed. These are all meant to be internal names. Are there any issues with changing this? If we do so, it means that any module built with 2.5 that is using these names will fail to work in 2.5.1. No code outside the core *should* be using these names.
I'll look into this. I will create macros in the header file for them, so that existing source code will continue to compile. Regards, Martin
On 1/18/07, "Martin v. Löwis"
Neal Norwitz schrieb:
http://python.org/sf/1637022 points out a problem caused by the lack of a _Py prefix on Ellipsis. Most (all?) of the new AST names are not prefixed. These are all meant to be internal names. Are there any issues with changing this? If we do so, it means that any module built with 2.5 that is using these names will fail to work in 2.5.1. No code outside the core *should* be using these names.
I'll look into this. I will create macros in the header file for them, so that existing source code will continue to compile.
Regards, Martin
Hi, I started to look into this based on Neal's suggestions (in offline conversation). Please let me know if you want me to continue. Thanks, Raghu.
participants (4)
-
"Martin v. Löwis" -
Neal Norwitz -
Raghuram Devarakonda -
Thomas Wouters