On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 17:55:24 +0200 mar...@v.loewis.de wrote: > > That's true. I would have hoped for it to be recognized only when > > there's at least one module or package inside, but it doesn't sound > > easy to check for (especially in the recursive namespace packages case > > - is that possible?). > > Yes - a directory becomes a namespace package by not having an __init__.py, > so the "namespace package" case will likely become the default, and people > will start removing the empty __init__.pys when they don't need to support > 3.2- anymore.
Have you tested the performance of namespace packages compared to normal packages? > In the long run, I expect that we will see namespace packages such as > org.openstack, com.canonical, com.ibm, etc. Then, "com" is a namespace > package, com.canonical is a namespace package, and com.canonical.launchpad > might still be a namespace package with multiple portions. I hope we are spared such naming schemes. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
