On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 19:19, P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote:
> At 01:51 PM 7/22/2010 +0100, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > >> At EuroPython, I sat down with Brett and we propose an approach >> how namespace packages get along with import hooks. I reshuffled >> the order in which things get done a little bit, and added a >> section that elaborates on the hooks. >> >> Basically, a finder will need to support a find_path method, >> return all .pth files, and a loader will need to support a >> load_module_with_path method, to initialize __path__. >> >> Please comment if you think that this needs further changes; >> > > I'm not certain I understand it precisely. There seem to be some > ambiguities in the spec, e.g.: > > "If fullname is not found, is not a package, or does not have any *.pth > files, None must be returned." > > What does "is not a package" actually mean in that context? The module is a module but not a package. > What happens if an empty list is returned - does that mean the importer is > saying, "this is a package, whether it has an __init__.py or not?" > > As for the "list of strings" returned, is each string the entire contents > of the .pth file? Is it to be \n-separated, or is any > universal-newlines-compatible string accepted? Is there a particular order > in which .pth file contents are to be returned? > > Regarding load_module_with_path(), how does its specification differ from > simply creating a module in sys.modules, setting its __path__, and then > invoking the standard load_module()? (i.e., is this method actually needed, > since a correct PEP 302 loader *must* reuse an existing module object in > sys.modules) It must reuse the module itself but a proper reload would reset __path__ as leaving it unchanged is not a proper resetting of the module object. So this module is needed in order to force the loader > > > > I'll hope to start implementing it soon. >> > > Am I correct in understanding that, as written, one would have to redefine > __import__ to implement this in a library for older Python versions? Or is > it implementable as a meta_path importer? > Redefine __import__ (unless Martin and I are missing something, but I tried to think of how to implement this use sys.meta_path and couldn't come up with a solution). -Brett > > > Regards, >> Martin >> > > Thanks for your work on this, I was just thinking about pinging to see how > it was going. ;-) > > (I want setuptools 0.7 to be able to supply an add-on module for supporting > this PEP in older Pythons, so that its current .pth hacks for implementing > namespace packages can be dropped.) > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/brett%40python.org >
_______________________________________________ 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
