steve at pearwood.info
Sat Feb 27 02:24:36 CET 2010
On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 09:09:26 am Brett Cannon wrote:
> I think it's almost a dis-service to support bytecode-only
> files as it leads people who are misinformed or simply don't take the
> time to understand what is contained in a .pyc file into a false
> sense of security about their code not being easy to examine by
> someone else.
You say that as if it were a bad thing.
Personally, I can't imagine ever wanting to ship a .pyc module without
the .py, but since Python already gives people the opportunity to shoot
themselves in the foot, meh, we're all adults here. I do recall a
poster on comp.lang.python pulling his hair out over a customer who was
too big to fire, but who had the obnoxious habit of making random
so-called "fixes" to the poster's .py files, so perhaps byte-code only
distribution isn't all bad.
But I don't care much either way.
More information about the Python-Dev