Hi, I've another subject related to import machinery to add in this thread. We've discussed about this at py-dev when I found an inconsistent import/zipimport behavior with .pyc/.pyo compiled modules:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-November/057959.html http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-November/057983.html I think that is a good idea to separate the 'optimization' option (-O) and 'no-docstring' option (-OO). I would like to +1 the Phillip J. Eby suggestion about 'JUMP_IF_NOT_DEBUG' opcode to remove the requirement of a .pyo file generation: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-November/057985.html Thanks, Osvaldo On 4/20/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm changing the list and the subject, pulling this quote out of python-dev: > > On 4/20/06, in python-dev, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was hoping that for Python 3.0, we could get around to unkludge the > > sys.path/meta_path/path_hooks/path_importer_cache big ball of hacks, > > possibly by replacing sys.path with something a bit more intelligent than > > a plain list. > > That's an excellent idea. Are there any volunteers here to help out? > Even just listing specific use cases / scenarios that are currently > difficult to solve right would be tremendously helpful. (I think that > Phillip's and others' experience with setuptools might be very > useful.) > > -- > --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) -- Osvaldo Santana Neto (aCiDBaSe) icq, url = (11287184, "http://www.pythonbrasil.com.br";) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
