May 6, 2009
7:59 a.m.
On May 5, 2009, at 10:50 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 12:03 PM 5/6/2009 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
I don't see any advantage, in the context of this discussion, to having an additional, incompatible naming for full-path-to-a-class.
Setuptools doesn't limit an entry point to being a class, function, or other top-level name within a module. It can be a method of a class, or an attribute of an attribute. The ':' removes any ambiguity as to which part of the name is the module, and which parts are attributes within that module.
Is that level of complexity useful in practice? I can understand how it came to be implemented, but is it actually used by any projects? Doug