[Stackless] Re: Stackless 3.0 for Python 2.3: new binaries
tismer at stackless.com
Tue Feb 24 03:55:50 CET 2004
Bob Ippolito wrote:
> This is not an authoritative response, because I don't actually know,
> however here is my guess:
> But I must reiterate that I have no idea.. never looked at the IDLE
> source code, don't use IDLE, haven't been on python-dev long enough to
> notice if/when this happened... I have however run into these sorts of
> problems on my own plenty of times and solved them to various degrees
> (but have not written a full out RPC mechanism, though I would like to
> at some point if a good one doesn't yet exist).
I'm no IDLE or Tcl/Tk user, either. But I had Tcl problems,
before. What I really would hate is to have to build the Tcl
stuff and debug that.
What I'm probably going to try tomorrow is to disable all
pikcling extensions at all and see if it runs, then.
Then I will re-enable them, one after the other.
My guess is that something gets pickled because it shows
up as pickleable, through introspection.
Maybe a special case is hit again (like with cell objects)
that needs to use the ternary __reduce__ protocol. I don't know.
I need sleep. ciao - chris
Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer at stackless.com>
Mission Impossible 5oftware : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9a : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14109 Berlin : PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
work +49 30 89 09 53 34 home +49 30 802 86 56 mobile +49 173 24 18 776
PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/
Stackless mailing list
Stackless at stackless.com
More information about the Stackless