Message 346100 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	jdemeyer
Recipients	jdemeyer, ncoghlan, petr.viktorin, scoder, steve.dower, vstinner
Date	2019-06-20.05:34:32
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<[email protected]>
In-reply-to

Content
The fact that tp_vectorcall_offset replaces tp_print was a very conscious decision that we made already when designing the PEPs (both PEP 580 and PEP 590). We shouldn't just throw that away without a good reason. So far I haven't seen any good reason, only an unsubstantiated claim that it is supposedly more backwards compatible to put tp_vectorcall_offset at the end.

The fact that tp_vectorcall_offset replaces tp_print was a very conscious decision that we made already when designing the PEPs (both PEP 580 and PEP 590). We shouldn't just throw that away without a good reason.

So far I haven't seen any good reason, only an unsubstantiated claim that it is supposedly more backwards compatible to put tp_vectorcall_offset at the end.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2019-06-20 05:34:33	jdemeyer	set	recipients: + jdemeyer, ncoghlan, scoder, vstinner, petr.viktorin, steve.dower
2019-06-20 05:34:33	jdemeyer	set	messageid: <[email protected]>
2019-06-20 05:34:33	jdemeyer	link	issue37250 messages
2019-06-20 05:34:32	jdemeyer	create