Nick Coghlan, 12.08.2013 00:41:
> On 11 Aug 2013 09:55, "Stefan Behnel" wrote:
> this already suggests a simple module initialisation interface.
> The
> extension module would expose a function that returns a module type,
> and
> the loader/importer would then simply instantiate
On 11 Aug 2013 09:55, "Stefan Behnel" wrote:
>
> Nick Coghlan, 11.08.2013 15:19:
> > On 11 Aug 2013 09:02, "Stefan Behnel" wrote:
> >>> BTW, this already suggests a simple module initialisation interface.
The
> >>> extension module would expose a function that returns a module type,
and
> >>> the
Eli Bendersky, 11.08.2013 19:43:
> Out of curiosity - can we list actual use cases for this new design? The
> previous thread, admittedly, deals with an isoteric corner-cases that comes
> up in overly-clever tests. If we plan to serious consider these changes -
> and this appears to be worth a PEP
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Nick Coghlan, 11.08.2013 15:19:
> > On 11 Aug 2013 09:02, "Stefan Behnel" wrote:
> >>> BTW, this already suggests a simple module initialisation interface.
> The
> >>> extension module would expose a function that returns a module type,
> an
Nick Coghlan, 11.08.2013 15:19:
> On 11 Aug 2013 09:02, "Stefan Behnel" wrote:
>>> BTW, this already suggests a simple module initialisation interface. The
>>> extension module would expose a function that returns a module type, and
>>> the loader/importer would then simply instantiate that. Nothin
