Having just slogged my way through the entire import thread so far, I've got to ask why nobody else has demanded a PEP before we go any further? There are too many competing proposals; we need a good summary of what design we're planning, plus a summary of why all other proposals are rejected. I'm a very strong -1 on anything until there's a PEP. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You discover truth everytime you use it." --reddy@lion.austin.ibm.com
aahz> I'm a very strong -1 on anything until there's a PEP. Try PEP 273. I don't believe Just's original proposal meant to go beyond that. Skip
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002, Skip Montanaro wrote:
aahz> I'm a very strong -1 on anything until there's a PEP.
Try PEP 273. I don't believe Just's original proposal meant to go beyond that.
Doesn't look that way to me: Just is, after all, proposing a brand-new import hook mechanism. His proposal is *compatible* with PEP 273, but it's definitely not the same thing. That's not even talking about all the bandwidth that's been consumed with other ideas -- the whole point of the PEP mechanism is to avoid losing that valuable information! -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You discover truth everytime you use it." --reddy@lion.austin.ibm.com
Aahz <aahz@pythoncraft.com> writes:
Doesn't look that way to me: Just is, after all, proposing a brand-new import hook mechanism. His proposal is *compatible* with PEP 273, but it's definitely not the same thing. That's not even talking about all the bandwidth that's been consumed with other ideas -- the whole point of the PEP mechanism is to avoid losing that valuable information!
I agree that a PEP should be written for anything that is going to be accepted; I disagree that the whole point of the PEP mechanism is to avoid losing valuable information. Instead, I think the purpose of the PEP processis to focus the discussion, so all people know they are talking about the same thing, and you can better tell what remarks are off-topic, and avoid endless repetition of the same observations. In this discussion, I think PEP 273 helped to focus the discussion, as every proposal for a new import mechanism had to show that it can provide the feature of that PEP (i.e. zipfile imports). Regards, Martin
Having just slogged my way through the entire import thread so far, I've got to ask why nobody else has demanded a PEP before we go any further? There are too many competing proposals; we need a good summary of what design we're planning, plus a summary of why all other proposals are rejected.
I'm a very strong -1 on anything until there's a PEP.
Well, there's PEP 273 which only discusses a feature (import from zip files) and an API (strings in sys.path that reference zip files). The PEP stands (I pronounce it accepted if it helps). But I agree that any API changes beyond that (either in C or in Python) need more consideration, and a PEP would be fine. BTW, it's curious to see the discussion follow the path of the sun around the earth. :-) --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Aahz:
Having just slogged my way through the entire import thread so far, I've got to ask why nobody else has demanded a PEP before we go any further? There are too many competing proposals; we need a good summary of what design we're planning, plus a summary of why all other proposals are rejected.
I'm a very strong -1 on anything until there's a PEP.
Well, there's PEP 273 which only discusses a feature (import from zip files) and an API (strings in sys.path that reference zip files). The PEP stands (I pronounce it accepted if it helps).
But I agree that any API changes beyond that (either in C or in Python) need more consideration, and a PEP would be fine.
Yeah, I should have been clearer that I meant "any changes beyond what's in PEP 273"; I did read PEP 273 before posting to see whether there was coverage of the thread. I think this really needs a new PEP rather than updating PEP 273, because (as you say) PEP 273 covers its domain clearly. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You discover truth everytime you use it." --reddy@lion.austin.ibm.com
participants (4)
-
Aahz -
Guido van Rossum -
martin＠v.loewis.de -
Skip Montanaro