On 11/9/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe it makes more sense to deprecate .pyo altogether and instead > have a post-load optimizer optimize .pyc files according to the > current optimization settings?
I agree with this idea, but we've to think about docstrings (like Nicola said in his e-mail). Maybe we want to create a different and optimization-independent option to remove docstrings from modules? > Unless others are interested in this nothing will happen. > > I've never heard of a third party making their code available only as > .pyo, so the use case for changing things isn't very strong. In fact > the only use cases I know for not making .py available are in > situations where a proprietary "canned" application is distributed to > end users who have no intention or need to ever add to the code. I've other use case: I'm porting Python to Maemo Platform and I want to reduce the size of modules. The .pyo (-OO) are smaller than .pyc files (mainly because docstring removing) and we start to use this optimization flag to compile our Python distribution. In this case we want to force developers to call Python Interpreter with -O flags, set PYTHONOPTIMIZE, or apply my patch :) to make this more transparent. I've noticed this inconsistency when we stop to use zipimport in our Python For Maemo distribution. We've decided to stop using zipimport because the device (Nokia 770) uses a compressed filesystem. Some friends (mainly Gustavo Barbieri) help me to create the suggested patch after some discussion in our PythonBrasil mailing list. Thanks, Osvaldo -- Osvaldo Santana Neto (aCiDBaSe) icq, url = (11287184, "http://www.pythonbrasil.com.br";) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
