On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:31, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 12:15:16 -0400 > "R. David Murray" <rdmur...@bitdance.com> wrote: > > > > 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. > > In reply to David, one trick with this, though, is that frozen modules don't store the magic number of the bytecode, so that would need to change in order to make this fully feasible. > Compiling from source at which point, though? > At startup of the interpreter. > In essence, that would mean reimplement Python/freeze_importlib.py in C? > We could even compile it to a separate executable that gets built > before the Python executable (like pgen) :-) > So a mini Python that just knew how to compile to bytecode and nothing more? -Brett > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/brett%40python.org >
_______________________________________________ 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
