Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34k
gh-117398: Add datetime C-API type check test for subinterpreters#119604
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Conversation
neonene commented May 27, 2024 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
ericsnowcurrently left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The test makes sense. Thanks for adding it. I have one question.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated. Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase |
neonene commented May 28, 2024
I have made the requested changes; please review again. |
Thanks for making the requested changes! @ericsnowcurrently: please review the changes made to this pull request. |
ericsnowcurrently commented May 28, 2024
It looks like part of your PR was removed by mistake. I thought the new test in |
ericsnowcurrently left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for moving that test! There's just one thing to address and then this PR should be ready to merge. Thanks for your patience.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated. Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase |
neonene commented Jun 13, 2024
I have made the requested changes; please review again. |
Thanks for making the requested changes! @ericsnowcurrently: please review the changes made to this pull request. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
ericsnowcurrently left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Thanks @neonene for the PR, and @ericsnowcurrently for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.13. |
…rs (pythongh-119604) Check if the DateTime C-API type matches the datetime.date type on main and shared/isolated subinterpreters. (cherry picked from commit 50a3895) Co-authored-by: neonene <53406459+neonene@users.noreply.github.com>
GH-120463 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.13 branch. |
ericsnowcurrently commented Jun 13, 2024
Thanks again for all your work on this, @neonene! |
…rs (pythongh-119604) Check if the DateTime C-API type matches the datetime.date type on main and shared/isolated subinterpreters.
…rs (pythongh-119604) Check if the DateTime C-API type matches the datetime.date type on main and shared/isolated subinterpreters.
…rs (pythongh-119604) Check if the DateTime C-API type matches the datetime.date type on main and shared/isolated subinterpreters.
Check if the
DateTypeC-API type matches thedatetime.datetype on main and shared/isolated subinterpreters.@ericsnowcurrently Please review if this usage is not invalid.