2010/1/31 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com>: > Georg Brandl wrote: >> Then why did Subversion choose to follow the CVS way and create a >> subdirectory in each versioned directory? IMO, this is much more >> annoying given the alternative of a single .hg/.bzr/whatever directory. >> For .pyc vs .pyr, you didn't have the alternative of putting all that >> stuff in one directory now. > > I actually like the svn/cvs way, since each directory in the working > copy is self-contained. The DVCS way means that you can't tell just by > looking at a directory whether it is part of a working copy or not - > there is a non-local element affecting you at a higher point in the > filesystem hierarchy.
Exactly. How would you define where the pyr folder goes? At the root of a package? What if I delete the __init__.py file there? Will the existing pyr folder be orphaned and a new one created in each subfolder? Unlike VCS working copies, the package / module / script hierarchy is not formally defined in python. Having one single pyr (or__pycache__ or whatever it's called) subfolder per folder is an easy to understand, solid solution. I'm also in favor of making this folder non-hidden. Unlike a .git or.hg folder, it impacts the code execution itself. Think of the newbies! .pyc files already lead to heisenbugs for inexperienced developers (e.g. importing a lingering pyc instead of an intended module with the same name further down sys.path), and they're in plain sight. _______________________________________________ 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
