[Python-ideas] My objections to implicit package directories
ronaldoussoren at mac.com
Mon Mar 26 10:49:18 CEST 2012
On 21 Mar, 2012, at 15:22, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:49, Ronald Oussoren <ronaldoussoren at mac.com> wrote:
> On 13 Mar, 2012, at 9:15, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > I think it comes down to this: I really, really, really hate
> > directories with a suffix. I'd like to point out that the suffix is
> > also introducing a backwards incompatibility: everybody will have to
> > teach their tools, IDEs, and brains about .pyp directories,
> Directories with a suffix have the advantage that you could teach GUIs to treat
> them differently, filemanagers could for example show a ".pyp" directory as
> a folder with a python logo just like ".py" files are shown as documents with
> a python logo.
> OS X has made me dislike that possibility. Some git tools will make directories ending in .git be considered an opaque object in the file system, forcing me to drop into a shell or right-click and choose to inspect the directory in order to see its contents.
That's probably because those tools define ".git" directories as a package in their metadata and the finder won't show package contents by default (you can use the context menu of the finder to inspect the contents of packages, but that won't work in the file open/save panels).
I'd have to experiment to be sure, but IIRC it is possible to assign icons to a suffix without making directories into packages.
> With the implicit approach it is much harder to recognize python packages as
> such without detailed knowledge about the import algorithm and python search
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas