[Python-Dev] PEP 399: Pure Python/C Accelerator Module Compatibiilty Requirements (original) (raw)

Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Wed Apr 6 22:37:00 CEST 2011

On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 13:22:09 -0700 Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:45, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at gmail.com_ _> wrote:

> > On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > Since people are taking my "semantically identical" point too strongly > for what I mean (there is a reason I said "except in cases > > where implementation details of a VM prevents [semantic equivalency] > entirely"), how about we change the requirement that C acceleration code > must pass the same test suite (sans C specific issues such as refcount tests > or word size) and adhere to the documented semantics the same? It should get > us the same result without ruffling so many feathers. And if the other VMs > find an inconsistency they can add a proper test and then we fix the code > (as would be the case regardless). And in instances where it is simply not > possible because of C limitations the test won't get written since the test > will never pass. > > Does the whole PEP just boil down to "if a test is C specific, it should be > marked as such"? > How about the test suite needs to have 100% test coverage (or as close as possible) on the pure Python version?

Let's say "as good coverage as the C code has", instead ;)

Regards

Antoine.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list