Summary of .pyc-Discussion so far (was Re: [Python-Dev] Proposal: .pyc file format change)

[Fredrik Lundh]

Trent Mick wrote:
> > But this would not solve the problem with 8 byte versus 4 byte =
timestamps
> > in the header on 64-bit OSes.  Trent Mick pointed this out.
>=20
> I kind of intimated but did not make it clear: I wouldn't worry about =
the
> limitations of a 4 byte timestamp too much. That value is not going to
> overflow for another 38 years. Presumably the .pyc header (if such a =
thing
> even still exists then) will change by then.

note that py_compile (which is used to create PYC files after =
installation,
among other things) treats the time as an unsigned integer.

so in other words, if we fix the built-in "PYC compiler" so it does the =
same
thing before 2038, we can spend another 68 years on coming up with a
really future proof design... ;-)

I really hope Py3K will be out before 2106.

as for the other changes: *please* don't break the header layout in the
1.X series.  and *please* don't break the "if the magic is the same, I =
can
unmarshal and run this code blob without crashing the interpreter" rule
(raising an exception would be okay, though).

</F>