[Python-ideas] Importing orphaned bytecode files

Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Wed Dec 9 20:11:58 CET 2009


On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 02:22, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ben Finney wrote:
>> > Right, that's what I thought. I was only looking for a way to say “only
>> > use a bytecode file if the corresponding source code file exists”, and
>> > then trying to define “corresponding source code file”.
>>
>> As Guido said, the check goes the other way: the interpreter looks for
>> source files first, and if it doesn't find one, only then does it look
>> for orphaned bytecode files (pyo/pyc).
>>
>
> Just a data point: I reversed that order in importlib to match mental
> semantics.

IIRC zipimport also reverses the order.

>> The check for a corresponding bytecode files after a source file has
>> actually been found follows a different path through the import code.
>>
>> Since the two features are somewhat orthogonal, slicing out the check
>> for orphaned bytecode files while keeping the check for a cached
>> bytecode file should be fairly straightforward.
>>
>> Fair warning to anyone that implements this - expect to be updating
>> quite a few parts of the test suite. The runpy, command line, import and
>> zipimport tests would all need to be updated to make sure they were
>> respecting the flag (and probably the importlib tests as well, at least
>> in Py3k).
>
> Yep for importlib, but I already protect bytecode-writing tests with a
> decorator for sys.dont_write_bytecode, so doing this for tests that rely on
> reading bytecode could easily be decorated as well.
> -Brett

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)



More information about the Python-ideas mailing list