On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:40:43 -0700, Glenn Linderman <v+python@g.nevcal.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2012 12:34 AM, Eric Snow wrote:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Barry Warsaw<barry@python.org> wrote:
It's somewhat of a corner case, but I think a PEP couldn't hurt. The
rationale section would be useful, at least.
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2012-April/014954.html
My conclusion is that sys.implementation clearly should not be part of
the stdlib, but rather be part of the language implementation. Whether
it then fits with the rest of what is in sys, or not, I am not qualified
to say. If not, perhaps a new module name is warranted... perhaps
"implementation" at the top level of the namespace.
IMO, there are two different things here that you are conflating(*): the
*implementation* of the stdlib, and the stdlib *API*. sys.implementation
would be a part of the API that any conforming implementation of
python+stdlib would be required to implement.