question about including something like sqlite in python
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Tue Sep 12 01:36:41 CEST 2006
John Salerno <johnjsal at NOSPAMgmail.com> writes:
> I was just thinking, since Python 3.0 is supposed to clean up a lot
> of the unnecessary or redundant features of Python and make other
> things more streamlined, does it seem to anyone that including
> SQLite goes against this goal?
To my mind, "unnecessary or redundant" is more on the order of
'rfc822', since its functionality is now entirely superseded by
> This is just me thinking out loud, mind you, but it seems like
> including a database module (especially one that many people won't
> use in favor of MySQL or PostgreSQL, etc.) is weighing down the
> standard library.
Python's philosophy is also one of "batteries included". The module
adds something useful to many people that doesn't currently exist in
Python; but if it's not needed, a module that never gets imported
won't weigh down a program.
If the byte-count size of the standard library on disk is an issue for
someone, Python is probably not the right choice for them.
\ "My girlfriend has a queen sized bed; I have a court jester |
`\ sized bed. It's red and green and has bells on it, and the ends |
_o__) curl up." -- Steven Wright |
More information about the Python-list