"Benjamin Peterson" <musiccomposition(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Carl Friedrich Bolz <cfbolz(a)gmx.de> wrote:
> > I think the idea is nice, but PyPy couldn't really expose a "pypy"
> > module, since that is the namespace the implementation itself is living
> > in. Maybe add a suffix to the implementation name? cpython_vm or so.
> You can name your implementation specific module anything you want. We're
> not forcing anybody else to use our naming scheme! :)
Yes and no.
If important information is in the interpreter-specific location, it
would be nice to know where that is. That could be a specific module
name, but a module-name-pattern might be enough.
sys.interpreter=cpython (or pypy_js_43, or whatever is chosen)
cpython_vm (or pypy_js_43_vm) is the module for internals
Also note that even the interpreter-specific modules will probably be
somewhat related. Just because something is implementation-defined
doesn't mean prevent implementations from making similar choices.
For example, even if Jython chooses to limit recursion only through
memory exhaustion, some pypy targets might use exactly the same limits
as standard CPython -- in which case, the obvious names for them to
use will match CPython.