Added some more info on PyModule_GetState doc.

[s3rius]

This PR adds more information on how to use the PyModule_GetState function, clarifying what argument should be passed.

At first glance, people might incorrectly think they need to pass a pointer to a state struct that the function will populate, but that is not the case.

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--138823.org.readthedocs.build/

[python-cla-bot]

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.

[sobolevn]

Maybe like this?

[sobolevn]

Suggested change

This makes modules safe to use with sub‑interpreters.

This is too specific.

[s3rius]

But isn't it the most useful feature of this function? Otherwise it doesn't makes sense to store per-module state.

[sobolevn]

Maybe instead link to the PEP?

[s3rius]

Added PEP link.

[ZeroIntensity]

Sorry, but I disagree. PEPs shouldn't be used as documentation, because they're solely historical documents and don't receive updates when we change things. I think we should keep the "This makes modules safe to use with sub‑interpreters" sentence, because yes -- that's what this function is for.

[skirpichev]

I suggest leave things as is. There's no issue.

Maybe just add PEP link, indeed.

[s3rius]

@skirpichev, @sobolevn. Intead of all the changes added link to the respective PEP. Can you please take a look once again?

[sobolevn]

Suggested change

	See :PEP:`489` for more details.
	See :pep:`489` for more details.

[skirpichev]

I'm still not sure if that's helpful. PEP 489 introduces a lot of API, why mention it just there? And also PyModule_GetState() was added by a different PEP, IIRIC.

[ZeroIntensity]

Please don't solely link to the PEP. I think the original sentence ("This makes modules safe to use with sub‑interpreters") was fine.

[bedevere-app]

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 I 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.