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 phraseI have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

And if you don't make the requested changes,you will be poked with soft cushions!

we discussed on bpo to use fewer places, but you add more.

I'm not sure what you mean. The only thing that we discussed (onbpo-37483 which relates to a different PR) is that maybe we should not use private functions in_decimal.c. However, in this case I'm using a documented public function, belonging to the limited APIPyObject_CallNoArgs.

So please let me know whether the changes to_decimal.c should be reverted anyway.

The PR title mentions_PyObject_CallNoArg(). I see now that there are other functions in the_decimal.c diff, but again not in speed sensitive locations.

So perhaps there are too many new functions. I'll decide later if to use any of these, so yes, please take them out.

not in speed sensitive locations.

Even if it's not speed sensitive, I see no reason to preferPyObject_CallObject(func, NULL) overPyObject_CallNoArgs(func).

I have made the requested changes; please review again

Thanks for making the requested changes!

@skrah: please review the changes made to this pull request.