[Python-ideas] Add from __experimental__ import bla [was: Should we move to replace re with regex?]

Devin Jeanpierre jeanpierreda at gmail.com
Sun Aug 28 06:35:32 CEST 2011

> Keeping it third-party means many people will be reluctant to
> add it as a dependency to any code they put out.

I'd spin this as a good thing: the code is, after all, experimental.


On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 7:50 PM, Mike Graham <mikegraham at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Dj Gilcrease <digitalxero at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> In the thread about replacing re with regex someone mentioned adding
>>> to __future__ which isnt a great idea as future APIs are already
>>> solidified, they just live there to give developer time to adapt their
>>> code. The idea of a __experimental__ area is good for any pep's or
>>> stliib additions that are somewhat controversial (API isnt agreed on,
>>> code may take a while to integrate properly, developer wants some time
>>> to hash out any edge case bugs or API clarifications that may come up
>>> in large scale testing, etc).
>>> __experimental__ should emit a warning on import that says anything in
>>> here may change or be removed at any time and should not be used in
>>> stable code.
>>> __experimental__ features should behave the same as __future__ in that
>>> they can add new keywords or semantics to the existing language
>>> __experimental__ features can move directly to the stlib or builtins
>>> if they do not add new keywords and/or are backwards compatible with
>>> the feature they are replacing. Otherwise they move into __future__
>>> for how ever many releases are deemed reasonable time for developers
>>> to adapt their code.
>> If something's still experimental, why ship it as stdlib? Why not just
>> keep it third party until integration? No reason to tempt people to do
>> anything that needs a warning. If they want some software, they can
>> install it.
> Putting it in the stdlib labeled as experimental would send a signal
> that it's slated for stdlib inclusion (in this case to replace the re
> module) and makes it available to everyone with the right Python
> version. Keeping it third-party means many people will be reluctant to
> add it as a dependency to any code they put out.
> That said, I'm not all that keen on my __experimental__ idea. The
> point of __future__ was that it would be recognized by the parser as
> it was parsing the file, so it could then modify its parsing tables on
> the fly. That's not needed for an experimental module. Telling people
> to use "import regex as re" is probably good enough, as we go that
> route. But personally, I'd much rather see either the existing re
> module upgraded, or the regex module replace the re module as of
> Python 3.3. Either of those sounds like a better solution for users of
> Python 3.3. But I realize it's more work for the core developers.
> --
> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list