[Python-Dev] __file__

[Brett Cannon]

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 16:58, Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com> wrote:

> The one issue I thought would be resolved by not easily allowing
> .pyc-only distributions is the case when you rename a file (say
> module.py to newmodule.py) and there is a module.pyc laying around,
> and you don't get the ImportError you would expect from "import
> module" -- and to make it worse everything basically works, except
> there's two versions of the module that slowly become different.


Yes, that problem would go away if bytecode-only modules were no longer
supported.


>  This
> regularly causes problems for me, and those problems would get more
> common and obscure if the pyc files were stashed away in a more
> invisible location.
>
>
That has never been an issue with this proposal. The bytecode pulled from
the __pycache__ directory only occurs if source exists. What we have been
discussing is whether bytecode-only files in the directory of a package or
something exists.

-Brett



> I can't even tell what the current proposal is; maybe this is
> resolved?  If distributing bytecode required renaming pyc files to .py
> as Glenn suggested that would resolve the problem quite nicely from my
> perspective.  (Frankly I find the whole use case for distributing
> bytecodes a bit specious, but whatever.)
>
> --
> Ian Bicking  |  http://blog.ianbicking.org  |
> http://twitter.com/ianbicking
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/brett%40python.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20100226/d7c5cada/attachment.html>