On 10 Jun 2014 18:41, "Paul Moore" <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 10 June 2014 08:36, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The standard implementation of run_path reads the whole file into > > memory, but MicroPython would be free to optimise that and do > > statement by statement execution instead (while that will pose some > > challenges in terms of handling encoding cookies, future imports, etc > > correctly, it's certainly feasible). > > ... and if they did optimise that way, I would imagine that the patch > would be a useful contribution back to the core Python stdlib, rather > than remaining a MicroPython-specific optimisation.
I believe it's a space/speed trade-off, so I'd be surprised if it made sense for CPython in general. There are also some behavioural differences when it comes to handling syntax errors. Now that I think about the idea a bit more, if the MicroPython folks can get a low memory usage incremental file execution model working, the semantic differences mean it would likely make the most sense as a separate API in runpy, rather than as an implicit change to run_path. Cheers, Nick. > > Paul
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
