> it has to be reproducing the byte code > interpreter in the code segment and the byte code in the data segment... > so that each .exe file created by said process is actually loading an > entire copy of at least the byte code interpreter with each program > "compiled" ...
Yes, if you think of it as a handy packager and not a compiler, it makes sense. > can't be very efficient?? How do you define efficient? All I know is that it works well. You click on the .exe and a moment later you are running the application despite not having Python installed on your computer. I'm grateful for its existence. Che -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
