On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com> wrote: > After a few rounds on import-sig PEP 451 is really for general > consumption. I also have a patch up now. > > HTML: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0451/ > implementation: http://bugs.python.org/issue18864 > > Your comments would be appreciated. > > -eric > > ============================================================= > > PEP: 451 > Title: A ModuleSpec Type for the Import System > Version: $Revision$ > Last-Modified: $Date$ > Author: Eric Snow <ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com> > Discussions-To: import-...@python.org > Status: Draft > Type: Standards Track > Content-Type: text/x-rst > Created: 8-Aug-2013 > Python-Version: 3.4 > Post-History: 8-Aug-2013, 28-Aug-2013, 18-Sep-2013, 24-Sep-2013 > Resolution: > > > Abstract > ======== > > This PEP proposes to add a new class to importlib.machinery called > "ModuleSpec". It will provide all the import-related information used > to load a module and will be available without needing to load the > module first. Finders will directly provide a module's spec instead of > a loader (which they will continue to provide indirectly). The import > machinery will be adjusted to take advantage of module specs, including > using them to load modules.
Any comments? Usually silence implies no disapproval. ;) PEP 451 did go through several rounds of review on import-sig, so I'm not going to stress over low feedback at this point. However, I'd particularly appreciate knowing if there are any objections to ModuleSpec for 3.4. Otherwise I'd like to get pronouncement on the PEP. Thanks! -eric _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
