Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

bpo-1635741: Port _bisect extension module to multiphase initialization(PEP 489) #18049

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

shihai1991
Copy link
Member

@shihai1991 shihai1991 commented Jan 18, 2020

Copy link
Contributor

@rhettinger rhettinger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks fine to me, but should be reviewed by someone who understands whether this makes any sense. AFAICT there is no real world benefit to making the change. I do not understand PEP 489 as requiring that every extension module be rewritten.

@shihai1991
Copy link
Member Author

This looks fine to me, but should be reviewed by someone who understands whether this makes any sense. AFAICT there is no real world benefit to making the change. I do not understand PEP 489 as requiring that every extension module be rewritten.

@rhettinger Hi, raymond, sorry for the late reply. I think that every module should be ported to multiphase init(it could support sub-interpreter and create multiple object from same extension object code). I check _bisect extension module again and found that this module use _Py_IDENTIFIER(https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/Modules/_bisectmodule.c#L9), so i close this PR temporarily just waiting for future work.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants