On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 31, 2013 5:50 PM, "Nick Coghlan" <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com> wrote:
That said, Larry's original proposal relates to sys, a built-in module written in C (in CPython of course). In that case the solution is not quite the same, since module initialization interacts with sys.modules differently. [1][2] Accommodating the original request would require more work, whether to muck with the import C-API or making sys an instance of another type, as someone suggested.
sys is already special cased so heavily in the interpreter initialization, making it a little more special really wouldn't bother me much :)
As far as customising other extension modules goes, the same "replace yourself in sys.modules" trick should still work, you'd just do it via the C API from your module init function.
Don't extension modules get added to sys.modules only after their init function returns?
Oh, you're right, they're currently responsible for creating their own module object (I was thinking of the way I *wished* extension module imports worked). Returning the module object from the init function still works though - we just need to make sure the extension loader can cope with the init function returning a non-module object :) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia