On Jun 24, 2010, at 11:27 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: >> While the idea is fine with me since I won't have any of my >> directories cluttered with multiple .so files, I would still want to >> add some moniker showing that the version number represents the >> interpreter and not the .so file. If I read "foo.3.2.so", that naively >> seems to mean to mean the foo module's 3.2 release is what is in >> installed, not that it's built for CPython 3.2. So even though it >> might be redundant, I would still want the VM name added. > >Well, for versions of the .so itself, traditionally version numbers >are appended *after* the .so suffix (check your /lib directory :-).
Which is probably another reason not to use foo.so.X.Y for Python extension modules. I think it would be confusing, and foo.<tag>.so looks nice and is consistent with foo.<tag>.pyc. (Ref to updated patch coming...) -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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
