redundant importr

[max(01)*]

Peter Hansen wrote:
> max(01)* wrote:
> 
>> Peter Hansen wrote:
>>
>>> No it doesn't.  I thought I was clear, but I can reword
>>> it for you: the files are compiled *in-memory* and the
>>> results are never written to disk.
>>>
>>>  > *if* they are compiled, where are they put, if the
>>>
>>>> corresponding *.py files are on a non-writeable directory?
>>>
>>>
>>> They are not put anywhere.  
>>
>>
>> ok, maybe it is an implementation-dependent issue after all.
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
>> consider this:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>> -rw-r--r--    1 max2     max2          307 2005-04-02 17:45 imported.pyc
>>
>> see?
> 
> 
> Yes, but you don't, yet. :-)
> 
> Obviously the .pyc file is being written, so my comments
> above, out of context, is wrong.
> 

oops!

> Now please go put them back in context.  You asked what
> would happen if the directory was not writable.  That's
> the context in which to interpret my claims that the
> bytecode (the *result* of the compilation) is not
> written to disk.
> 
> I'll try one last time, before giving up in abject
> failure and letting someone else take a stab at this:
> the compilation will occur every time if a .pyc file
> does not exist.  The interpreter will attempt to write
> the results of the compilation process to disk in a
> ..pyc file to cache it for the next time, to avoid
> having to recompile.  *If* this is not possible, then
> no caching takes place, no .pyc file is written, and
> the next time you run the code, the compilation step
> will occur all over again (note: with the results being
> held in memory only while the program runs, then
> discarded).
> 
> Please tell me it's clear now. :-)

it's not clear. it's crystalline. :-)

thanks for your patience and help.

best regards

macs