[Python-3000] Python 3.0a2 release

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Tue Nov 20 14:37:48 CET 2007

Paul Moore wrote:
> On 20/11/2007, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc <amauryfa at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Am I missing something? Should we lift the restrictions we impose on
>> compilers of extension modules? Can we carefully design the Python API
>> to accept different compilers/runtime?
> I have done similar experiments in the past. There is no formal
> definition of where issues may exist, and I have never encountered a
> crash in my experiments. However, the "official position" (to whatever
> extent there can be an "official" position in a volunteer open source
> project) is that the same CRT must be used.

I believe the reason that's the consensus python-dev position is because 
even though we acknowledge that it is *possible* to use multiple CRT's 
in a single running program, a Python mailing list isn't really the best 
place to ask for advice on what can safely cross the boundary when you 
do it.

Using two different CRT's in the same program massively multiplies the 
number of things that can go wrong. If a problem occurs while mixing 
CRT's, but not-so-mysteriously vanishes when the program is recompiled 
to use a single CRT, it's a fairly safe bet that one of the unwritten 
rules of safe CRT mixing is being violated.

If someone already understands the rules for mixing CRT's and has a 
reason to do it then more power to them (I do it at work all the time 
due to toolset limitations). On the other hand, if someone doesn't 
understand the restrictions, then it isn't our (or the c.l.p crowd's) 
job to teach them.


Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list