On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 14:40:33 -0700 Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017, at 14:19, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > Nice one. > > > > It would be nice to specify the various APIs needed as well. > > The compileall and py_compile ones? > > > > > Why do you keep the mtime-based format as an option? (Maybe because it's > > faster? Did you measure it?) > > I haven't actually measured anything, but stating a file will definitely > be faster than reading it completely and hashing it. I suppose if the > speed difference between timestamp-based and hash-based pycs turned out > to be small we could feel good about dropping the timestamp format > completely. However, that difference might be hard to determine > definitely as I expect the speed hit will vary widely based on system > parameters such as disk speed and page cache size.
Also, while some/many of us have fast development machines with performant SSDs, Python can be used in situations where "disk" I/O is still slow (imagine a Raspberry Pi system or similar, grinding through a SD card or USB key to load py and pyc files). Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
