[Python-Dev] Should I postpone PEP 558 (locals() semantics) to Python 3.9? (original) (raw)

Nathaniel Smith njs at pobox.com
Fri May 31 04:34:08 EDT 2019

I wouldn't mind having a little more breathing room. It's frustrating to miss the train, but these bugs are several decades old so I guess nothing terrible will happen if their fixes get delayed to 3.9.

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 4:23 PM Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi folks, The reference implementation for PEP 558 (my attempt to fix the interaction between tracing functions and closure variables) is currently segfaulting somewhere deep in the garbage collector, and I've found that there's an issue with the PyEvalGetLocals() API returning a borrowed reference that means I need to tweak the proposed C API a bit such that PyEvalGetLocals() returns the proxy at function scope, and we add a new PyEvalGetPyLocals() that matches the locals() builtin. I don't want to postpone this to Python 3.9, but there turned out to be more remaining work than I thought there was to get this ready for inclusion in beta 1. I'll try to get the C API design details sorted today, but the segfault is mystifying me, and prevents the option of putting the core implementation in place for b1, and tidying up the documentation and comments for b2. Cheers, Nick.

Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev at python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/njs%40pobox.com

-- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list