On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 1:30 PM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> On 07:24 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 3:50 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Brett Cannon wrote: >> >>> Good enough for me. Then I am just going to ignore the 'path' argument >>> for frozen modules but use it to short-circuit imports for built-in >>> modules. >> >> For what it's worth, Twisted uses the __path__ attribute to facilitate >> its plugin mechanism. If this changes so that importing from frozen >> packages no longer honors __path__, then Twisted will no longer support >> plugins if the package to be plugged into is frozen. >> >> What is the motivation to change this? > > If I had to guess, I'd say Brett found some time to tinker with his > import_in_py implementation.
Yep, it's called trying to prevent it from becoming true vaporware while procrastinating. =) > That has been an interesting exercise in > blowing dust out of some of the dark corners of CPython's current import > *implementation* (particularly in areas that stray outside of the > current documentation and PEP 302), and it isn't always clear which > behaviour can be safely skipped and which needs to be faithfully > replicated to avoid breaking 3rd party utilities. > You can say that again. Once I have a backwards-compatible version ready to be merged into the core I will have a PEP or two to write that will help make the semantics more uniform and easier to follow. > If the current system is setting __path__ to a string in frozen > packages, I'd have to wonder how well any existing __path__ manipulation > tools handle frozen packages without special-casing them. > I doubt anyone does. As Thomas asked, do people really even still use frozen modules? -Brett _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com