Parts of 2.2.1 core use old gc API

[tim-one]

BPO	575715
Nosy	@gvanrossum, @tim-one, @nascheme

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = 'https://github.com/nascheme'
closed_at = <Date 2002-08-05.15:47:44.000>
created_at = <Date 2002-06-30.18:18:04.000>
labels = ['interpreter-core']
title = 'Parts of 2.2.1 core use old gc API'
updated_at = <Date 2002-08-05.15:47:44.000>
user = 'https://github.com/tim-one'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2002-08-05.15:47:44.000>
actor = 'gvanrossum'
assignee = 'nascheme'
closed = True
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Interpreter Core']
creation = <Date 2002-06-30.18:18:04.000>
creator = 'tim.peters'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 575715
keywords = []
message_count = 4.0
messages = ['11399', '11400', '11401', '11402']
nosy_count = 3.0
nosy_names = ['gvanrossum', 'tim.peters', 'nascheme']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'accepted'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue575715'
versions = ['Python 2.2']

[tim-one]

At least generators, iterators, and bound method
objects in 2.2.1 are using the 2.1 gc API internally
(PyObject_GC_Init & friends), which collapses to a
bunch of nops. That's not intentional, right? I'm
tempted to call it a critical bug, except nobody has
noticed <wink>.

[nascheme]

Logged In: YES
user_id=35752

It wasn't intentional but it's been known for a while. No
one complained
and so we didn't fix it in a bugfix release. I think it
would be considered a
new feature. Maybe we should leave it up to the 2.2 release
manager to
decide.

This is a good example of why it would be useful to have an
option to
disable compatibilty code.

[nascheme]

Logged In: YES
user_id=35752

I've removed the noops. Should I re-enable GC for these
types? Assigning
to Guido for pronouncement or delegation.

[gvanrossum]

Logged In: YES
user_id=6380

I don't think we need to enable GC for those types in 2.2
unless we find specific cases where it's needed in an app.

(Tim said bound method objects, sending me off on a wild
goose chase for a bit, until I realized he meant "whatever's
in methodobject.c". This is a misnomer -- it contains the
code for C functions. Bound methods are in classobject.c,
under the name "instance method" (in 2.3, "instancemethod").
Also a misnomer. :-( )