Miguel Lobo schrieb: > It won't benefit the Python core either, because we just don't use > builtin submodules. In fact, I find the notion of builtin submodules > somewhat strange. > > > Please excuse my curiosity, but why do you find it strange?
Normally, the builtin modules are the ones that are shipped in Python core. I know you can get a bigger builtins list through freeze, or through a custom Setup.local, but it is fairly uncommon to do that. Also, having extension modules in a namespace is something that I would normally not do. I couldn't tell off-hand whether having extension modules in a package would even work (but apparently, it does), so I would make them global modules just to be safe. Also, they normally have a canonical naming: if they wrap a library called libfoo, the extension module would normally be called foo.so or foomodule.so (on a Unix system; foo.pyd on Windows). As DLLs don't have hierarchical names, extension modules don't need hierarchical names, either. Putting these two boundary cases (additional builtin modules, and modules in packages) is something that I find unlikely to run into. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ 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
