On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:51:42 +0200 Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> wrote: > Antoine Pitrou, 24.08.2013 13:53: > > This would also imply extension module have to be subclasses of the > > built-in module type. They can't be arbitrary objects like Stefan > > proposed. I'm not sure what the latter enables, but it would probably > > make things more difficult internally. > > My line of thought was more like: if Python code can stick anything into > sys.modules and the runtime doesn't care, why can't extension modules stick > anything into sys.modules as well? > > I can't really see the advantage of requiring a subtype here. Or even just > a type, as I said.
sys.modules doesn't care indeed. There's still the whole extension-specific code, though, i.e. the eternal PyModuleDef store and the state management routines. How much of it would remain with your proposal? 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
