On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > On Sun, 28 Aug 2011 01:36:50 +1000 > Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 1:15 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> >> wrote: >> > This is exactly what I worry about. I think adding file I/O to bz2 was a >> > mistake, as this doesn't integrate with Python's IO library (it used >> > to, but now after dropping stdio, they were incompatible. Indeed, for >> > Python 3.2, BZ2File has been removed from the C module, and lifted to >> > Python. >> > >> > IOW, the _lzma C module must not do any I/O, neither directly nor >> > indirectly (through liblzma). The approach of gzip.py (doing IO >> > and file formats in pure Python) is exactly right. >> >> PEP 399 also comes into play - we need a pure Python version for PyPy >> et al (or a plausible story for why an exception should be granted). > > The plausible story being that we basically wrap an existing library? > I don't think PyPy et al have pure Python versions of the zlib or > OpenSSL, do they? > > If we start taking PEP 399 conformance to such levels, we might as well > stop developing CPython.
It's acceptable for the Python version to use ctypes in the case of wrapping an existing library, but the Python version should still exist. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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
