The more examples I see of the 'py' and 'site' top level namespaces, the
less I like them. Let's dispose of 'site' first; it's been common to
show examples like:
from gui import wx
However, wx currently, and presumably for the forseeable future, lives
in site packages, so we'd actually have something like:
from site.gui import wx
from site.gui import pygui
from py.gui import tkinter
That seems confusing and suboptimal. So, presumably what we want is for
packages that get installed under site-packages to logically live under
the main headings so that, for example, all of the above imports would
be "from gui ...".
That eliminates most of the uses for 'site' and if 'site' is gone I fail
to see much use for the 'py' package either. Let's just ditch them both
and save ourselves a layer of cruft.
On a slightly different topic, the library reorganization only seems
useful if it's accompanied by some increased smarts in either the import
machinery or the installation code such that one could do:
>>> import gui
>>> dir(gui)
['wx', 'tkinter', 'pygui']
>>> help(gui)
wx - GUI toolkit based on wxWidgets
tkinter - GUI toolkit based on TK
pygui - Another GUI toolkit
You don't want to import the full packages most of the time, so perhaps
at least part of the smarts needs to be in the installer. I any event,
reorganizing the standard lib seems at best a minor upgrade if it
doesn't also support introspection.
I would be nice to also be able to inquire about what top level packages
were available, but I'm not sure how to spell that since I just banished
'py' ;-| Perhaps:
>>> import sys
>>> dir(sys.packages)
['gui', 'web', 'database', ....]
Regards,
-tim
_______________________________________________
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
