<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:53 PM Eric Irrgang <<a href="mailto:ericirrgang@gmail.com">ericirrgang@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">It is also possible to avoid this by<br>
sticking to <<a href="https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/stable.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/stable.html</a>><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This does not provide ABI stability, and recompilation is still required. Python ABI stability is improving, but I don't think we can ever count on a single module build for all Python installations.</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Sorry, that was not worded helpfully... To expand:</div><div>* It is unlikely that we will be able to implement and maintain an efficient package with Py_LIMITED_API.</div><div>* In addition to version-driven ABI differences, Python installations of the same release can even be incompatible for various reasons, including linking and tool chain differences. I don't think this is worth reinvestigating until our minimum supported Python version is at least 3.7.</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>