On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: >> > I should mention another option is to add sys.dont_read_bytecode (I >> > think I >> > have discussed this with Frank at some point). >> >> Or check for "sys.implementation.cache_tag is None"... > > > Perfect! Will that work for Jython (Franke) and IronPython (Jeff)? So Jython does actually emit bytecodes, but they are Java bytecodes instead of Python bytecodes. Right now they end up next to the .py files just like .pyc files. They have the possibly unfortunate naming foo.py -> foo$py.class -- If I understand cache_tag (I may not) I guess Python 3 is putting the .pyc files into hidden subdirectories instead of putting them next to the .py files? If so we may do the same with our $py.class files.
Incidentally we also have a mode for reading .pyc files -- though we haven't implementing writing them yet (we probably will eventually) I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't know exactly how we will handle these new flags, but chances are we will use them (Again provided my guesses about what they do are anywhere near what they really do). > > This does mean, though, that imp.cache_from_source() and > imp.source_from_cache() might need to be updated to raise a reasonable > exception when sys.implementation.cache_tag is set to None as I believe > right now it will raise a TypeError because None isn't a str. But what to > raise instead? TypeError? EnvironmentError? NotImplementedError seems fine for me too if we don't end up using this flag. -Frank _______________________________________________ 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
