OK, since no one has really said anything, I am going to assume no one has issues with importlib in terms of me checking it in or choosing a name for it (I like importlib more than imp so I will probably stick with that).
So I will do some file renaming and reorganization, get the code set up to be run by regrtest, and then check the code in! I am going to set PyCon as a hard deadline such that no matter how much more file churn I have left I will still check it into py3k by then (along with importlib.import_module() into 2.7). On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:06, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > My work rewriting import in pure Python code has reached beta. > Basically the code is semantically complete and as > backwards-compatible as I can make it short of widespread testing or > running on a Windows box. There are still some tweaks here and there I > want to make and an API to expose, but __import__ works as expected > when run as the import implementation for all unit tests. > > Knowing how waiting for perfection leads to never finishing, I would > like to start figuring out what it will take to get the code added to > the standard library of 3.1 with hopes of getting the bootstrapping > stuff done so that the C implementation of import can go away in 3.1 > as well. I see basically three things that need to be decided upfront. > > One, does anyone have issues if I check in importlib? We have > typically said code has to have been selected as best-of-breed by the > community first, so I realize I am asking for a waiver on this one. > > Two, what should the final name be? I originally went with importlib > since this code was developed outside of the trunk, but I can see some > people suggesting using the imp name. That's fine although that does > lead to the question of what to do with the current imp. It could be > renamed _imp, but then that means what is currently named _importlib > would have to be renamed to something else as well. Maybe > imp._bootstrap? Plus I always viewed imp as the place where really > low-level, C-based stuff lived. Otherwise importlib can slowly subsume > the stuff in imp that is still useful. > > Three, there are still some structural changes to the code that I want > to make. I can hold off on checking in the code until these changes > are made, but as I said earlier, I know better than to wait forever > for perfection. > > And because I know people will ask: no, I do not plan to backport all > the code to 2.7. I want this to be a carrot to people to switch to > 3.x. But I will backport the import_module function I wrote to 2.7 so > people do have that oft-requested feature since it is a really simple > bit of Python code. > > -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
