[Bf-committers] Meeting notes: 2.48 plans

Roger Wickes rogerwickes at yahoo.com
Fri Sep 26 14:27:43 CEST 2008

in my experience, afaik, no. You're right, it should, but in updating the bpyarmature module and running tests with my baking script, I was bit by this many times (until it was beaten into my head). It also seems to "compile" randomly, which simply means I do not understand the algorithm it uses, or it works like a jar file in the respect that you have to trigger it to update. 

Sent by Roger Wickes for intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and contact Mr. Wickes immediately.

Atlantica Investments, Inc.
PO Box 680310, Marietta, GA 30068 USA

----- Original Message ----
From: Mathias Panzenböck <grosser.meister.morti at gmx.net>
To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 5:23:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Meeting notes: 2.48 plans

Roger Wickes schrieb:
> I think if you just delete the pyc files, it forces Python to re-compile
> (actually re-byte-code) the source...which is what the reload() does.
> Perhaps these pyc should not be distributed or if they are not, people
> may be copying over the source but not deleting the pyc modules, and
> thus still have the old byte-code files being used.

Maybe I don't understand something here, but if the time stamp of the pyc file
is older than the one on the corresponding py file python recompiles the source.
Or does this work different when you use python as extension language?

Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers at blender.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/attachments/20080926/2f621184/attachment.htm 

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list