[Python-Dev] Getting importlib into the standard library for 3.1

[Michael Foord]

Brett Cannon wrote:
> OK, since no one has really said anything, I am going to assume no one
> has issues with importlib in terms of me checking it in or choosing a
> name for it (I like importlib more than imp so I will probably stick
> with that).
>
> So I will do some file renaming and reorganization, get the code set
> up to be run by regrtest, and then check the code in! I am going to
> set PyCon as a hard deadline such that no matter how much more file
> churn I have left I will still check it into py3k by then (along with
> importlib.import_module() into 2.7).
>   

+1

:-) 

Michael
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:06, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>   
>> My work rewriting import in pure Python code has reached beta.
>> Basically the code is semantically complete and as
>> backwards-compatible as I can make it short of widespread testing or
>> running on a Windows box. There are still some tweaks here and there I
>> want to make and an API to expose, but __import__ works as expected
>> when run as the import implementation for all unit tests.
>>
>> Knowing how waiting for perfection leads to never finishing, I would
>> like to start figuring out what it will take to get the code added to
>> the standard library of 3.1 with hopes of getting the bootstrapping
>> stuff done so that the C implementation of import can go away in 3.1
>> as well. I see basically three things that need to be decided upfront.
>>
>> One, does anyone have issues if I check in importlib? We have
>> typically said code has to have been selected as best-of-breed by the
>> community first, so I realize I am asking for a waiver on this one.
>>
>> Two, what should the final name be? I originally went with importlib
>> since this code was developed outside of the trunk, but I can see some
>> people suggesting using the imp name. That's fine although that does
>> lead to the question of what to do with the current imp. It could be
>> renamed _imp, but then that means what is currently named _importlib
>> would have to be renamed to something else as well. Maybe
>> imp._bootstrap? Plus I always viewed imp as the place where really
>> low-level, C-based stuff lived. Otherwise importlib can slowly subsume
>> the stuff in imp that is still useful.
>>
>> Three, there are still some structural changes to the code that I want
>> to make. I can hold off on checking in the code until these changes
>> are made, but as I said earlier, I know better than to wait forever
>> for perfection.
>>
>> And because I know people will ask: no, I do not plan to backport all
>> the code to 2.7. I want this to be a carrot to people to switch to
>> 3.x. But I will backport the import_module function I wrote to 2.7 so
>> people do have that oft-requested feature since it is a really simple
>> bit of Python code.
>>
>> -Brett
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/fuzzyman%40voidspace.org.uk
>   


-- 
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog