IMO this function is a poor fit for the limited API: it uses varargs, making it difficult to use from non-C languages. See alsocapi-workgroup/problems#35

IMO this function is a poor fit for the limited API: it uses varargs, making it difficult to use from non-C languages. See alsocapi-workgroup/problems#35

The C API has multiple functions using varargs:

• PyErr_Format()
• PyUnicode_FromFormat()

Right, they cannot be used in programming languages other than C.

But well, C remains widely used, and using this function is relevant in C, no? Which alternative do you propose?

PySys_Audit() is related to security and it doesn't get thesys.audit() function from thesys module but uses directly the C implementation. Overridingsys.audit() has no effect on PySys_Audit().

The C API has multiple functions using varargs

Yup, but they all have alternatives that don't use varargs -- you can usePyErr_SetString orPyUnicode_FromStringAndSize, after you format the string using some other mechanism.

There's no such alternative toPySys_Audit. IMO, one should be added before this is added to stable ABI. Perhaps a function that takes the tuple of arguments (which is slower as the tuple would always be built, soPySys_Audit would still be preferred if you can use varargs).

@encukou:

Yup, but they all have alternatives that don't use varargs -- you can use PyErr_SetString or PyUnicode_FromStringAndSize, after you format the string using some other mechanism.
There's no such alternative to PySys_Audit. IMO, one should be added before this is added to stable ABI. Perhaps a function that takes the tuple of arguments (which is slower as the tuple would always be built, so PySys_Audit would still be preferred if you can use varargs).

I'm not sure that I can follow your rationale. Because there are programming languages which cannot use a C API with variadic arguments, the... arguments inPySys_Audit(), you would like that all users of the limited C API have to go through aslower implementation, by always creating the tuple?

These programming languages can already build a tuple and callsys.audit(). There is no need to add anything here. For me, the most convenient is PyTuple_Pack(), but it also uses variadic arguments:PyObject* PyTuple_Pack(Py_ssize_t, ...). Or you can usePyObject* Py_BuildValue(const char *, ...), oh wait, it also uses variadic arguments.

Are you sure that there are programming languages which are used to write Python extensions and cannot use variadic arguments? In C, variadic arguments are very commonly used, byprintf() for example.

For me, the advantage of addingPySys_Audit() is that its API is easier to use than having to build a tuple manually (for check errors), get the sys module (check for errors), call theaudit() function (check for errors), and clear temporary objects.

Note:PySys_Audit() is implemented by callingPy_VaBuildValue(argFormat, vargs) to make a Python tuple object.

If there are programming languages which are used to write Python extensions and cannot use variadic arguments, why not letting them to callsys.audit() via the "Python" API (create a tuple, get the sys module, call theaudit() function)? Why would other programming languages have to suffer from that?

I think that C and C++ are still commonly used these days to write C extensions for Python.

I'm not sure that I can follow your rationale. Because there are programming languages which cannot use a C API with variadic arguments, the ... arguments in PySys_Audit(), you would like that all users of the limited C API have to go through a slower implementation, by always creating the tuple?

No. Those that can usePySys_Audit should still use that. I'm asking toalso add an alternative.

Are you sure that there are programming languages which are used to write Python extensions and cannot use variadic arguments?

It was mentioned by@steve-s incapi-workgroup/problems#35 (comment). Should we dig for the rationale?

In C, variadic arguments are very commonly used, by printf() for example.

Yup, C uses them a lot, but e.g. Rust is doing just fine without vararg functions.

These programming languages can already build a tuple and call sys.audit().

As you mentioned,sys.audit can be reassigned by the user. It's not a proper replacement.

I wrote PR#108965 to add PySys_AuditTuple() to the non-limited C API.

Since it's a new API, I would prefer to start by adding it the non-limited C API first, and wait one version to move it the limited C API. Just in case if something goes wrong.

Thank you!
OK, but let's wait withPySys_Audit too, so both are added at the same time.

OK, but let's wait with PySys_Audit too, so both are added at the same time.

Sorry, you want to wait for what?

I would prefer to wait until bothPySys_Audit andPySys_AuditTuple can be added to the stable ABI, together.

I would prefer to wait until both PySys_Audit and PySys_AuditTuple can be added to the stable ABI, together.

Right. I updated my PR to add PySys_Audit() and PySys_AuditTuple() to the limited C API version 3.13 (and so to the stable ABI).

Merged. Thanks@encukou for telling me about variadic arguments, the additional of the PySys_AuditTuple() function solves this issue.