[Catalog-sig] PyPI trove classifiers for alternate language implementations

Michael Foord fuzzyman at gmail.com
Sat Nov 19 15:14:49 CET 2011

On 18 November 2011 21:44, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:

> On 11/18/2011 6:57 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
>> On 18 November 2011 08:31, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de
>> <mailto:martin at v.loewis.de>> wrote:
>>    Am 15.11.2011 23:53, schrieb Michael Foord:
>>     > Whilst we're considering new classifiers - any word on this one?
>>    I lost track: what't the proposal, and what's the consensus?
>> Programming Language :: Python :: Implementation :: CPython
>> Programming Language :: Python :: Implementation :: PyPy
>> Programming Language :: Python :: Implementation :: Jython
>> Programming Language :: Python :: Implementation :: IronPython
>> Programming Language :: Python :: Implementation :: Stackless
>> There seemed to be agreement that classifiers for the different
>> implementations was useful.
>> M-A Lemburg suggested adding versions *as well*. Jean-Paul Calderone and
>> I thought it was unnecessary as Jython and IronPython are now using
>> CPython version numbers and different versions of all the
>> implementations tend to target a specific Python language version - for
>> which we already have classifiers.
>> M-A Lemburg disliked the the "Implementation" part of the classifier (he
>> was only -0 on it though). I think it is useful/necessary to have it to
>> disambiguate these implementations from other Python-like-languages
>> (like Cython and Shedskin) that can be used to write Python extensions.
> For the purpose of searching, I cannot see how adding 'implementation'
> helps much -- unless there are a lot of other 3rd and 4th level classifiers
> that I do not know about. So I am - or + depending on the context.
> As I understand them, Shedskin compiles a subset and Cython a superset of
> Python.

Trove classifiers are for classification (and searching is a nice
consequence of that), right? It's a matter of accuracy. PyPy, IronPython
and Jython are *not* programming languages they are implementations of the
Python programming language. Shedskin and and Cython are python-like
programming languages (yes, subset and mostly-superset respectively).

A recent thread here mentioned that our classifiers already go to five
levels deep, so a four level classifier won't be "novel".


>  (As a matter of correctness all of these implementations provide "the
>> Python programming language" and strive very hard indeed not to be
>> distinct programming languages...)
> --
> Terry Jan Reedy
> ______________________________**_________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/**mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig>



May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111119/be5f7582/attachment.html>

More information about the Catalog-SIG mailing list