[Distutils] Making commands extensible by default

[cdavid]

Hi Tarek,


Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> 
> 
> == work in progress, ==
> 
> What we want to do here is being able to define subsets in run(),
> sharing the same options environment.
> 
> so basically, a rough, generic run() method could be:
> 
> def run():
>    for func in some_funcs:
>       func(self, options)
> 
> 

What exactly is options here ? The class instance member user_options or
something else (a dictionary of options common to each function, a bit like
environment variables in scons or waf).

A related problem, but maybe outside the scope of your proposal is dealing
with communication between commands. I think the only way to do it at the
moment is to attach those data to the Distribution instance - that's very
fragile (if only because every new distutils-related tool has its own
distribution class, so you have to special case for every one of them). For
me, that's one of the main issue in distutils: extending distutils without
breaking other tools (paver/setuptools).

I think we should also working with precise examples/usecases right away -
in my own experience at least, the difficulties with distutils are mostly
implementation details. I will work on a few examples which I found quite
painful to implement while working on the numpy build system and add them to
the wiki, to help the discussion,

cheers,

David
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Making-commands-extensible-by-default-tp22978698p23096059.html
Sent from the Python - distutils-sig mailing list archive at Nabble.com.