Re: PEP for the removal of PYO files

Barry Warsaw <[email protected]> Mon, 2 Mar 2015 17:38:42 -0500

Newsgroups	gmane.comp.python.import
Organization	Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On Feb 28, 2015, at 09:08 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:

>On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:50 AM Nick Coghlan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> * Can we make "opt-0" implied so normal pyc file names don't change at all?
>
>Sure, but why specifically? EIBTI makes me not want to have some optional
>bit in the file name just make someone's life who didn't use
>cache_from_source() a little easier.

I'd rather like opt-0 to be implied too, just because I think it will be the
common case and it's less clutter, but I could be convinced that for
consistency, opt-0 should be explicit.

Just like with old .pyo files, you'll still have to support *loading* implicit
opt-0 __pycache__ .pyc files.  Even if the bytecode has to be regenerated for
Python 3.5, you can't guarantee what tool will be generating it.  So for
backward compatibility with third party tools, I think you still have to
support loading the old file names for 3.5, but only if the new name doesn't
exist.

Cheers,
-Barry

_______________________________________________
Import-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/import-sig

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 819 B)