[Python-Dev] Pre-PEP: Redesigning extension modules

[Nick Coghlan]

On 25 Aug 2013 05:19, "Benjamin Peterson" <benjamin at python.org> wrote:
>
> 2013/8/24 Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu>:
> > On 8/24/2013 8:51 AM, Stefan Behnel 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?
> >
> >
> > Being able to stick anything in sys.modules in CPython is an
implementation
> > artifact rather than language feature.
>
> This is not really true. Many people use this feature to replace
> modules as they are being imported with other things.

Right - arbitrary objects in sys.modules is definitely a supported feature
(e.g. most lazy import mechanisms rely on that). However, such objects
should really provide the module level attributes the import system expects
for ducktyping purposes, which is why I suggest the import system should
automatically take care of setting those.

Cheers,
Nick.

>
> --
> Regards,
> Benjamin
> _______________________________________________
> 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/ncoghlan%40gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20130825/f6146a05/attachment.html>