Greg Ewing wrote:
I guess it's my anti-Scheme attitude. I just think the problem is in the deeply nested structures. There usually is a less nested data structure that doesn't have the problem.
and then he says:
Well, unclear. Frame chains make sense as chains because they are reference-counted individually.
which surely goes to show that sometimes it *does* make sense to use a deeply nested structure?
You might interpret him this way.
But I don't think he had my implementation of frame chain pickling in mind, because he doesn't know it, and nobody but me probably has a working one.
I'm pickling disjoint frame chains, and in my case, these are linked in both directions, via f_back, and via f_callee, for other reasons. There is no reason for nested pickling, just because of the caller/callee relationship.
I agree there might be useful situations for deeply nested structures, but not this one. Instead, it would be asking for problems.
ciao - chris