[Python-Dev] PEP 384 final review

["Martin v. Löwis"]

> Extensions built with Py_LIMITED_API have the python version encoded in
> it's name.  Which abi name should be used for these extensions?

PEP 3149, IIUC, says it should be "abi3". I don't understand what that
means, though (with respect to, say, distutils)

>  - The m and u modifiers in the abi name are complimentary (?)

See above: none of these will be used. Of course, it is possible to name
an ABI-conforming extensions with the regular ABI name of the
Python release.

>  - For posix systems the implementation is currently part of the abi name,
>    are Py_LIMITED_API extensions supposed to be compatible with e.g. PyPy?

That's a choice that PyPy needs to make, of course, but Amaury has
indicated that they are interested in doing so.

>    Should the LIMITED_API abi name include the implementation string?
>  - Should the distutils support for LIMITED_API be part of the pep, or
>    be implemented later?

Depends on what support you want. Currently, all you need to do is to
define Py_LIMITED_API to the preprocessor - this is something that is
already supported in distutils.

If you want the support suggested in PEP 3149 (specifying abi=3),
it should certainly be implemented in Python 3.2, despite the distutils
freeze.

Regards,
Martin