On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:56 AM, Alexandre Vassalotti <alexan...@peadrop.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> This PEP is an attempt to foster a number of small incremental >> improvements in a future pickle protocol version. The PEP process is >> used in order to gather as many improvements as possible, because the >> introduction of a new protocol version should be a rare occurrence. >> >> Feel free to suggest any additions. >> > > Your propositions sound all good to me. We will need to agree about the > details, but I believe these improvements to the current protocol will be > appreciated. > Also, one thing keeps coming back is the need for pickling functions and > methods which are not part of the global namespace (e.g. issue 9276). > Support for this would likely help us fixing another related namespace issue > (i.e., issue 3657). Finally, we currently missing support for pickling > classes with __new__ taking keyword-only arguments (i.e. issue 4727).
In the spirit of PEP 395 and python 3's pickle._compat_pickle, perhaps it would be worth looking at a mechanism whereby a pickle could specify "alternate class names" for included class instances in the pickle itself? 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
