[Python-Dev] Accepting PEP 3154 for 3.4?
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Mon Nov 18 16:48:27 CET 2013
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Mon Nov 18 16:48:27 CET 2013
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Accepting PEP 3154 for 3.4?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Accepting PEP 3154 for 3.4?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka at gmail.com>wrote: > 18.11.13 07:53, Tim Peters написав(ла): > > - Some easy sanity checking due to the tiny redundancy (if the byte >> immediately following the current frame is not a FRAME opcode, the >> pickle is corrupt; and also corrupt if a FRAME opcode is encountered >> _inside_ the current frame). >> > > For efficient unpickling a FRAME opcode followed by 8-byte count should be > *last* thing in a frame (unless it is a last frame). > I don't understand that. Clearly the framing is the weakest point of the PEP (== elicits the most bikeshedding). I am also unsure about the value of framing when pickles are written to strings. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20131118/2e1d4688/attachment.html>
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Accepting PEP 3154 for 3.4?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Accepting PEP 3154 for 3.4?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list