On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:21:34 -0400, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:07, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: > > > > We have other instances of this (e.g. the Objects/typeslots.inc file > > > is generated and checked in), but in the case of importlib, we have > > > to use the ./python binary for freezing to avoid bytecode > > > incompatibilities, which obviously is a problem if ./python isn't > > > built yet. > > > > As for dependencies on byte code: we could consider using Cython instead > > of freeze (not sure whether Cython would build the bootstrap correctly; > > it may need to be fixed first). With that, we would get semi-readable > > source code, which should also play more nicely with hg diffs. On the > > down side, we would depend on Cython for evolving . > > > > We could also just store the raw source code and use that if we are all > willing to pay the performance cost of parsing and compiling the code at > every startup.
I don't see how depending on Cython is better than depending on having an existing Python. If the only benefit is semi-readable code, surely we do have source code for the pre-frozen module, and it is just a matter of convincing hg that the bytecode is binary, not text? Brett's earlier thought of compiling from source as a *fallback* makes sense to me. I'd rather not add overhead to startup that we can avoid. --David
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
