On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Greg Ewing <greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > Tarek Ziadé wrote: > >> But the result is similar, and explicit imports should work too, so >> maybe registeries >> are just sugar on the top of something we first need to make work. > > It's completely unnecessary sugar, if you ask me. > I don't see what's bad about importing functionality > you want to use. > > Where and how do you intend the registration to happen, > anyway? Would it be done by the setup.py script? In > that case I don't see how it saves you anything, since > you would have to first import the thing you want to > register anyway. > > Or are you envisaging that Pyrex or whatever tool is > involved would somehow patch itself into distutils > when you install it? I don't like that idea much, > since it smacks of the kind of monkeypatching that > setuptools is reviled for. >
Patching ? No, I was thinking about a basic plugin registery, exactly like what we have *now* for commands with distutils.cfg, which is a simple configparser file where you can point packages that contains commands, so they are loaded when Distutils is run. (that's the "command-packages" option) So, using the same technique, we can explicitely list in such .cfg what are the compilers and where they are: [compilers] pyrex=pyrex.distutils:PyrexCompile Tarek _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
