Then options 2 and 3 are both fine. Not compiling at all is *not*, so if nobody has time to implement 2 or 3, we'll have to do 4.
--Guido On 5/21/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > What was the purpose of the patch in the first place? > > I don't fully understand it. I guess the objective of the patch > was to expose the feature of the underlying library. The SF > submission then gives the rationale for that feature as > > """ > Copying a > (de)compression object allows a developer to store the > state of the (de)compressor at a certain point of the > input stream in order to more efficiently compress data > sharing some identical header, or to more efficiently > seek inside compressed data. > """ > > The submitter first posted this message to c.l.p: > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/13f8ce4057162ad5 > > Apparently, one application is to take a snapshot of a gzip > file that is being created, then add to it, and if that fails > (e.g. because the size of the CD would be exceeded), truncate > it to back to the snapshot (and then close the zlib stream). > > Regards, > Martin > > > -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
