[Import-SIG] My objections to implicit package directories

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Tue Mar 13 04:51:05 CET 2012

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> (To elaborate on that last point: I recently realised that the
> algorithm described in PEP 395 could be applied *today* in the part of
> multiprocessing that figures out how to launch the child process on
> Windows. No PEP needed or public API change needed)

On further reflection, I'll retract that comment. I suspect the bad
interaction between multiprocessing and -m may be fixable just be
relying on the fact that -m already sets "__package__" and sys.argv[0]
appropriately and passing those two values through to the subprocess.

So, while potentially interesting in its own right, ultimately
irrelevant to the question of whether or not package directories
should require an explicit marker or if its OK for every directory
encountered to be implicitly considered a package.


Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Import-SIG mailing list