Message402752
I believe the following excerpt from the docs is incorrect (https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/typeobj.html#c.PyTypeObject.tp_base):
> Slot initialization is subject to the rules of initializing
> globals. C99 requires the initializers to be “address
> constants”. Function designators like PyType_GenericNew(),
> with implicit conversion to a pointer, are valid C99 address
> constants.
>
> However, the unary ‘&’ operator applied to a non-static
> variable like PyBaseObject_Type() is not required to produce
> an address constant. Compilers may support this (gcc does),
> MSVC does not. Both compilers are strictly standard
> conforming in this particular behavior.
>
> Consequently, tp_base should be set in the extension module’s init function.
I explained why in https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/thread/2WUFTVQA7SLEDEDYSRJ75XFIR3EUTKKO/ and on https://bugs.python.org/msg402738.
The short version: &foo is an "address constant" according to the standard whenever "foo" has static storage duration. Variables declared "extern" have static storage duration. Therefore strictly conforming implementations should accept &PyBaseObject_Type as a valid constant initializer.
I believe the text above could be replaced by something like:
> MSVC does not support constant initialization of of an address
> that comes from another DLL, so extensions should be set in the
> extension module's init function. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2021-09-28 00:24:44 | jhaberman | set | recipients:
+ jhaberman, docs@python |
2021-09-28 00:24:44 | jhaberman | set | messageid: <1632788684.07.0.376752176258.issue45306@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
2021-09-28 00:24:44 | jhaberman | link | issue45306 messages |
2021-09-28 00:24:43 | jhaberman | create | |
|