Message179002
| Author |
danielsh |
| Recipients |
Arfrever, danielsh, einarfd, eli.bendersky, ezio.melotti, flox, georg.brandl, jcea, larry, python-dev, santoso.wijaya, skrah |
| Date |
2013年01月04日.02:09:36 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<20130104020930.GS3005@lp-shahaf.local> |
| In-reply-to |
<CAF-Rda_comZDVpFmvzqRn6A2k2Xm1TnZiJVf6pzR07iRG-=8Uw@mail.gmail.com> |
| Content |
Eli Bendersky wrote on Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:44:02 +0000:
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Daniel Shahaf <report@bugs.python.org>wrote:
> > I added the "_elementtree" to the tp_name in order to bypass the above
> > error. Module-qualified names were in use elsewhere (including by
> > _elementtree._element_iterator) so it seemed reasonable. I'll defer to
> > you about compatibility implications of this change.
>
> I asked on pydev, but this is a key point to resolve. Can
> pickling/unpickling be made to work correctly without such (or similar)
> change at all? How will the unpickler know which module to load when it
> sees a pickled object of Element type?
Is there a requirement that it loads a particular module? Would etree
users notice the difference if pickle.load() returns an instance of the
"other" Element implementation than the one they pickled?
> Danial, could you investigate if such a change is absolutely required to
> make pickling/unickling of Element work?
Yes, I'll look into that. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2013年01月04日 02:09:37 | danielsh | set | recipients:
+ danielsh, georg.brandl, jcea, larry, ezio.melotti, Arfrever, eli.bendersky, skrah, flox, santoso.wijaya, python-dev, einarfd |
| 2013年01月04日 02:09:37 | danielsh | link | issue16076 messages |
| 2013年01月04日 02:09:36 | danielsh | create |
|