Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Nick Coghlan schrieb:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I personally consider it good style to rely on implementation details
of CPython;
Is there a 'do not' missing somewhere in there?
No - I really mean it. I can find nothing wrong with people relying on
reference counting
Hi Steven,
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 11:48:44PM -0700, Steven Bethard wrote:
(... pyc files ...)
For people wanting to ship just bytecode, the cached
.pyc files could be renamed to .py files and then those could be
shipped and imported.
Yuk! Not renamed to .py files. Distributing .py files
Armin Rigo wrote:
Yuk! Not renamed to .py files. Distributing .py files that are
actually bytecode looks like a new funny way to create confusion. No, I
was half-heartedly musing about introducing Yet Another file extension
(.pyc for caching and .pyX for importable bytecode, or possibly