[Python-Dev] Accepting PEP 3154 for 3.4? (original) (raw)

Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Tue Nov 19 23:09:40 CET 2013

On Tue, 19 Nov 2013 16:06:22 -0600 Tim Peters <tim.peters at gmail.com> wrote:

[Antoine] >>> Ahah, ok, I see where you're going. But how many other implementations >>> of unpickling are there?

[Tim] >> That's something you should have researched when writing the PEP ;-) >> How many implementations of Python aren't CPython? That's probably >> the answer. I'm not an expert on that, but there's more than one. [Antoine] > But "how many of them use something else than Lib/pickle.py" is the > actual question. I don't know - and neither do you ;-) I do know that I'd like, e.g., a version of pickletools.dis() in CPython that did show the framing bits, for debugging. That's a bare-bones "unpickler". I don't know how many other "partial unpicklers" exist in the wild either. But their lives would also be much easier if the framing stuff were explicit. "Mandatory optimization" should be an oxymoron ;-)

Well, I don't think it's a big deal to add a FRAME opcode if it doesn't change the current framing logic. I'd like to defer to Alexandre on this one, anyway.

Regards

Antoine.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list