gh-99249: Clarify "read-only" slots tp_bases & tp_mro #99342
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
These slots are marked "should be treated as read-only" in the table at the start of the document. That doesn't say anything about setting them in the static struct. `tp_bases` docs did say that it should be ``NULL`` (TIL!). If you ignore that, seemingly nothing bad happens. However, some slots may not be inherited, depending on which sub-slot structs are present. (FWIW, NumPy sets tp_bases and is affected by the quirk -- though to be fair, its DUAL_INHERIT code probably predates tp_bases docs, and also the result happens to be benign.) This patch makes things explicit. It also makes the summary table legend easier to scan.
kumaraditya303
approved these changes
Nov 25, 2022
Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
kumaraditya303
approved these changes
Nov 26, 2022
|
Thanks @encukou for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.10. |
|
Thanks @encukou for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.11. |
|
GH-99837 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.11 branch. |
miss-islington
pushed a commit
to miss-islington/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 28, 2022
…-99342) These slots are marked "should be treated as read-only" in the table at the start of the document. That doesn't say anything about setting them in the static struct. `tp_bases` docs did say that it should be ``NULL`` (TIL!). If you ignore that, seemingly nothing bad happens. However, some slots may not be inherited, depending on which sub-slot structs are present. (FWIW, NumPy sets tp_bases and is affected by the quirk -- though to be fair, its DUAL_INHERIT code probably predates tp_bases docs, and also the result happens to be benign.) This patch makes things explicit. It also makes the summary table legend easier to scan. (cherry picked from commit 219696a) Co-authored-by: Petr Viktorin <encukou@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
miss-islington
pushed a commit
to miss-islington/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 28, 2022
…-99342) These slots are marked "should be treated as read-only" in the table at the start of the document. That doesn't say anything about setting them in the static struct. `tp_bases` docs did say that it should be ``NULL`` (TIL!). If you ignore that, seemingly nothing bad happens. However, some slots may not be inherited, depending on which sub-slot structs are present. (FWIW, NumPy sets tp_bases and is affected by the quirk -- though to be fair, its DUAL_INHERIT code probably predates tp_bases docs, and also the result happens to be benign.) This patch makes things explicit. It also makes the summary table legend easier to scan. (cherry picked from commit 219696a) Co-authored-by: Petr Viktorin <encukou@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
|
GH-99838 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.10 branch. |
miss-islington
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 28, 2022
These slots are marked "should be treated as read-only" in the table at the start of the document. That doesn't say anything about setting them in the static struct. `tp_bases` docs did say that it should be ``NULL`` (TIL!). If you ignore that, seemingly nothing bad happens. However, some slots may not be inherited, depending on which sub-slot structs are present. (FWIW, NumPy sets tp_bases and is affected by the quirk -- though to be fair, its DUAL_INHERIT code probably predates tp_bases docs, and also the result happens to be benign.) This patch makes things explicit. It also makes the summary table legend easier to scan. (cherry picked from commit 219696a) Co-authored-by: Petr Viktorin <encukou@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
miss-islington
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 28, 2022
These slots are marked "should be treated as read-only" in the table at the start of the document. That doesn't say anything about setting them in the static struct. `tp_bases` docs did say that it should be ``NULL`` (TIL!). If you ignore that, seemingly nothing bad happens. However, some slots may not be inherited, depending on which sub-slot structs are present. (FWIW, NumPy sets tp_bases and is affected by the quirk -- though to be fair, its DUAL_INHERIT code probably predates tp_bases docs, and also the result happens to be benign.) This patch makes things explicit. It also makes the summary table legend easier to scan. (cherry picked from commit 219696a) Co-authored-by: Petr Viktorin <encukou@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
These slots are marked "should be treated as read-only" in the table at the start of the document. That doesn't say anything about setting them in the static struct.
tp_basesdocs do say that it should beNULL(TIL!). If you ignore that, seemingly nothing bad happens. However, some slots may not be inherited, depending on which sub-slot structs are present. (FWIW, NumPy sets tp_bases and is affected by the quirk -- though to be fair, its DUAL_INHERIT code probably predates tp_bases docs, and also the result happens to be benign.)This patch makes things explicit.
It also makes the summary table legend easier to scan.