[Python-Dev] Merging Jython code into standard Lib [was Re: Python Language Summit at PyCon: Agenda]

Brett Cannon brett at python.org
Sat Mar 2 16:58:47 CET 2013

On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 01:17:35 +1000
> Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'd go further and say we *should* move to that solution.
> >
> > Here's an interesting thought: for pure C modules without a Python
> > implementation, we can migrate to this architecture even *without*
> > creating pure Python equivalents. All we shou;d have to do is change
> > the test of the pure Python version to be that the module *can't be
> > imported* without the accelerator, rather than the parallel tests that
> > we normally implement when there's a pure Python alternative to the
> > accelerated version. (There would likely still be some mucking about
> > to ensure robust pickle compatibility, since that leaks implementation
> > details about exact module names if you're not careful)
> What benefit would this have?
> Current situation: each Python implementation has its own
> implementation of the zlib module (as a C module for CPython, etc.).
> New situation: all Python implementations share a single, mostly empty,
> zlib.py file. Each Python implementation has its own implementation of
> the _zlib module (as a C module for CPython, etc.) which is basically
> the same as the former zlib module.

Bare minimum? They all share the same module docstring. But it could be
extended to explicitly import only the public API into zlib.py, helping to
prevent leaking interpreter-specific APIs by accident (obviously would
still be available off of _zlib if people wanted them).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20130302/f88314dc/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list