Armin Rigo wrote: > Hi Phillip, > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 02:40:27PM -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote: >> If we don't revert it, there are two ways to fix it. One is to just change >> PEP 302 so that the behavior is unbroken by definition. :) The other is >> to actually go ahead and fix it by adding PathImporter and NullImporter >> types to import.c, along with a factory function on sys.path_hooks to >> create them. (This would've been the PEP-compliant way to implement the >> need-for-speed patch.) >> >> So, "fix" by documentation, fix by fixing, or fix by reverting? Which >> should it be? > > "fix" by changing the definition looks like a bad idea to me. The > import logic is already extremely complicated and delicate, any change > to it is bound to break *some* code somewhere.
Though beta1 and beta2 shipped with this change nobody reported any bug that could be linked to it. sys.path_importer_cache is quite an internal thing and most code, even import hooks, shouldn't have to deal with it. Georg _______________________________________________ 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
