这是为初学者准备的，

在运行脚本之前，Python会自动将脚本编译为已编译的代码，即所谓的字节代码。

运行脚本不被认为是导入，也不会创建.pyc。

例如，如果你有一个脚本文件abc.py，它导入了另一个模块xyz.py，当你运行abc.py时，xyz.py, xyz.py。Pyc将被创建，因为xyz被导入，但没有abc。Pyc文件将被创建，因为abc.py没有被导入。

如果你需要为一个未导入的模块创建一个.pyc文件，你可以使用py_compile和compileall模块。

py_compile模块可以手动编译任何模块。一种方法是交互式地使用该模块中的py_compile.compile函数:

>>> import py_compile
>>> py_compile.compile('abc.py')

这将把.pyc写到与abc.py相同的位置(你可以用可选参数cfile重写它)。

您还可以使用compileall模块自动编译一个或多个目录中的所有文件。

python -m compileall

如果省略目录名(本例中的当前目录)，模块将编译sys.path上的所有内容

它们包含字节代码，Python解释器将源代码编译为字节代码。这段代码随后由Python的虚拟机执行。

Python的文档是这样解释定义的:

Python是一种解释性语言，例如 而不是编译的 区别可能是模糊的，因为 字节码编译器的存在。 这意味着源文件可以 直接运行而不显式地运行 创建一个可执行文件，然后 运行。

这是为初学者准备的，

在运行脚本之前，Python会自动将脚本编译为已编译的代码，即所谓的字节代码。

运行脚本不被认为是导入，也不会创建.pyc。

例如，如果你有一个脚本文件abc.py，它导入了另一个模块xyz.py，当你运行abc.py时，xyz.py, xyz.py。Pyc将被创建，因为xyz被导入，但没有abc。Pyc文件将被创建，因为abc.py没有被导入。

如果你需要为一个未导入的模块创建一个.pyc文件，你可以使用py_compile和compileall模块。

py_compile模块可以手动编译任何模块。一种方法是交互式地使用该模块中的py_compile.compile函数:

>>> import py_compile
>>> py_compile.compile('abc.py')

这将把.pyc写到与abc.py相同的位置(你可以用可选参数cfile重写它)。

您还可以使用compileall模块自动编译一个或多个目录中的所有文件。

python -m compileall

如果省略目录名(本例中的当前目录)，模块将编译sys.path上的所有内容

为了加速加载模块，Python将模块的编译内容缓存在.pyc中。

CPython将源代码编译为“字节码”，出于性能考虑，当源文件发生更改时，CPython会将此字节码缓存到文件系统中。这使得Python模块的加载速度更快，因为可以绕过编译阶段。当你的源文件是foo.py时，CPython将字节代码缓存在foo.py文件中。Pyc文件就在源代码旁边。

在python3中，Python的导入机制被扩展为在每个Python包目录中的单个目录中写入和搜索字节码缓存文件。这个目录将被称为__pycache__。

下面是一个描述如何加载模块的流程图:

欲了解更多信息:

裁判:PEP3147 参考:“编译”的Python文件

Python(至少是它最常见的实现)遵循将原始源代码编译为字节码的模式，然后在虚拟机上解释字节码。这意味着(同样，最常见的实现)既不是纯解释器也不是纯编译器。

然而，另一方面，编译过程基本上是隐藏的——.pyc文件基本上被视为缓存;它们能加快速度，但你通常根本不需要注意到它们。它在必要时根据文件时间/日期戳自动使它们失效并重新加载(重新编译源代码)。

我所见过的唯一一次问题是，编译后的字节码文件以某种方式获得了未来的时间戳，这意味着它看起来总是比源文件更新。因为它看起来更新，源文件从来没有重新编译过，所以无论你做了什么更改，它们都被忽略了…

我是这么理解的 Python是一种解释性语言…

这个流行的迷因是不正确的，或者，更确切地说，是建立在对(自然)语言水平的误解之上的:类似的错误会说“圣经是一本精装书”。让我来解释一下这个比喻……

"The Bible" is "a book" in the sense of being a class of (actual, physical objects identified as) books; the books identified as "copies of the Bible" are supposed to have something fundamental in common (the contents, although even those can be in different languages, with different acceptable translations, levels of footnotes and other annotations) -- however, those books are perfectly well allowed to differ in a myriad of aspects that are not considered fundamental -- kind of binding, color of binding, font(s) used in the printing, illustrations if any, wide writable margins or not, numbers and kinds of builtin bookmarks, and so on, and so forth.

It's quite possible that a typical printing of the Bible would indeed be in hardcover binding -- after all, it's a book that's typically meant to be read over and over, bookmarked at several places, thumbed through looking for given chapter-and-verse pointers, etc, etc, and a good hardcover binding can make a given copy last longer under such use. However, these are mundane (practical) issues that cannot be used to determine whether a given actual book object is a copy of the Bible or not: paperback printings are perfectly possible!

Similarly, Python is "a language" in the sense of defining a class of language implementations which must all be similar in some fundamental respects (syntax, most semantics except those parts of those where they're explicitly allowed to differ) but are fully allowed to differ in just about every "implementation" detail -- including how they deal with the source files they're given, whether they compile the sources to some lower level forms (and, if so, which form -- and whether they save such compiled forms, to disk or elsewhere), how they execute said forms, and so forth.

The classical implementation, CPython, is often called just "Python" for short -- but it's just one of several production-quality implementations, side by side with Microsoft's IronPython (which compiles to CLR codes, i.e., ".NET"), Jython (which compiles to JVM codes), PyPy (which is written in Python itself and can compile to a huge variety of "back-end" forms including "just-in-time" generated machine language). They're all Python (=="implementations of the Python language") just like many superficially different book objects can all be Bibles (=="copies of The Bible").

If you're interested in CPython specifically: it compiles the source files into a Python-specific lower-level form (known as "bytecode"), does so automatically when needed (when there is no bytecode file corresponding to a source file, or the bytecode file is older than the source or compiled by a different Python version), usually saves the bytecode files to disk (to avoid recompiling them in the future). OTOH IronPython will typically compile to CLR codes (saving them to disk or not, depending) and Jython to JVM codes (saving them to disk or not -- it will use the .class extension if it does save them).

这些较低级别的表单然后由适当的“虚拟机”(也称为“解释器”)执行——CPython VM、. net运行时、Java VM(又名JVM)。

因此，在这个意义上(典型的实现是做什么的)，Python是一种“解释型语言”，当且仅当c#和Java是:它们都有一个典型的实现策略，首先产生字节码，然后通过VM/解释器执行它。

More likely the focus is on how "heavy", slow, and high-ceremony the compilation process is. CPython is designed to compile as fast as possible, as lightweight as possible, with as little ceremony as feasible -- the compiler does very little error checking and optimization, so it can run fast and in small amounts of memory, which in turns lets it be run automatically and transparently whenever needed, without the user even needing to be aware that there is a compilation going on, most of the time. Java and C# typically accept more work during compilation (and therefore don't perform automatic compilation) in order to check errors more thoroughly and perform more optimizations. It's a continuum of gray scales, not a black or white situation, and it would be utterly arbitrary to put a threshold at some given level and say that only above that level you call it "compilation"!-)