bytecode non-backcompatibility
Robert Kern
rkern at ucsd.edu
Sun Apr 24 07:06:35 EDT 2005
Maurice LING wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been using Python for about 2 years now, for my honours project and
> now my postgrad project. I must say that I am loving it more and more
> now. From my knowledge, Python bytecodes are not back-compatible. I must
> say that my technical background isn't strong enough but is there any
> good reason for not being back-compatible in bytecodes?
>
> My problem is not about pure python modules or libraries but the problem
> is with 3rd party libraries with C bindings (not python pure).
Then this has nothing to do with bytecode incompatibility. Only
pure-Python modules get compiled to bytecode. You mean binary
compatibility of the C API.
If you're going to have significant improvements in the core
interpreter, you have to break binary compatibility from time to time.
> It means
> that with every upgrade of python, I have to reinstall all my 3rd party
> libraries which can be quite a bit of work...
>
> I do hope this problem will be sorted out some day.
This problem is mitigated somewhat by the fact that the devs keep binary
compatibility within a major revision series (e.g. 2.3.0, 2.3.1, 2.3.2,
...).
--
Robert Kern
rkern at ucsd.edu
"In the fields of hell where the grass grows high
Are the graves of dreams allowed to die."
-- Richard Harter
More information about the Python-list
mailing list