[Guido van Rossum] > > On a 384 processor job we have once again encountered that old question of > > corrupted .pyc files, sometimes resulting in an error, sometimes in a silent > > wrong behavior later. I know this was allegedly fixed previously but it > > looks like it doesn't really work. We lost a couple of weeks work this time. > > > > Didn't we talk about an option to not make pyc files? I can't seem to find > > it. (We totally don't care about the cost of imports. The documentation > > mentions "ihooks" but not the module itself. I know that importing has been > > an area of create turmoil so I don't really know where to look.) I couldn't > > even find the list of command-line options for Python itself except a > > mention of -c in the tutorial. Any pointers would be appreciated. > > I don't think we have such an option, but it's a good idea. If you > submit a patch, we'll add it. > What about PEP 301 and an import hook? Couldn't a custom import hook be written up that didn't output a .py file? I would think it could be as simple as finding the file, opening it, and then compiling it as a module and inserting it directly into ``sys.modules``. Wouldn't that circumvent any .py(c|o) writing? Of course this assumes Paul is using 2.3, but even if he isn't couldn't a solution be used like that, helping to prevent needing to write a patch for Python (unless you want this in the 2.2 branch)? -Brett
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4