➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author vstinner
Recipients carljm, corona10, dino.viehland, eelizondo, gregory.p.smith, nascheme, pablogsal, pitrou, shihai1991, steve.dower, tim.peters, vstinner
Date 2020-04-14.22:55:03
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1586904903.69.0.750445151024.issue40255@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content 
This feature seems to be driven by Instagram use case. Are there other users who would benefit of that? Is it a common use case to load big data and then fork to use preloaded data?

PR 19474 has a maintenance cost:

* new configuration option
* new macro
* need a buildbot to check that the option is not broken
* document the change
* etc.

There is even now a question about using a different ABI flag.

It's not the common case to build a custom Python manually for a specific use case. Most users use a binary shipped by their operating system.

I'm not sure that it's worth it for Python to maintain such special build.

Maybe bpo-39511 would be a better motivation to support immortable objects.

But I'm also concerned by the huge impact on performance :-(
History
Date User Action Args
2020-04-14 22:55:03vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, tim.peters, nascheme, gregory.p.smith, pitrou, carljm, dino.viehland, steve.dower, corona10, pablogsal, eelizondo, shihai1991
2020-04-14 22:55:03vstinnersetmessageid: <1586904903.69.0.750445151024.issue40255@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2020-04-14 22:55:03vstinnerlinkissue40255 messages
2020-04-14 22:55:03vstinnercreate