Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Accepting PEP 3154 for 3.4?

Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Tue Nov 19 21:28:39 CET 2013 
On Tue, 19 Nov 2013 21:25:34 +0100
"Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Am 19.11.13 20:59, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
> > That's integrated to the built-in buffering. It's not really an
> > additional constraint: the frame sizes simply dictate how buffering
> > happens in practice. The main point of framing is to *simplify* the
> > buffering logic (of course, the old buffering logic is still there for
> > protocols <= 3, unfortunately).
> 
> I wonder why this needs to be part of the pickle protocol at all,
> if it really is "below" the opcodes. Anybody desiring framing could
> just implement a framing version of the io.BufferedReader, which
> could be used on top of a socket connection (say) to allow fetching
> larger blocks from the network stack. This would then be transparent
> to the pickle implementation; the framing reader would, of course,
> provide the peek() operation to allow the unpickler to continue to use
> buffering.
> 
> Such a framing BufferedReader might even be included in the standard
> library.

Well, unless you propose a patch before Saturday, I will happily ignore
your proposal.

Regards

Antoine.
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list