Modules for inclusion in standard library?

John Roth newsgroups at jhrothjr.com
Tue Jun 28 20:01:15 CEST 2005


"Reinhold Birkenfeld" <reinhold-birkenfeld-nospam at wolke7.net> wrote in 
message news:3ian37Fkjle0U1 at individual.net...
> Hello,
>
> at the moment python-dev is discussing including Jason Orendorff's path 
> module
> into the standard library.
>
> Do you have any other good and valued Python modules that you would think 
> are
> bug-free, mature (that includes a long release distance) and useful enough 
> to
> be granted a place in the stdlib?
>
> For my part, ctypes seems like a suggestion to start with.
>
> Reinhold

I'd go with path. While I'm not at all certain that it's "the" way
to go, it'll at least break the conceptual logjam caused by simply
providing wrappers around the C library functions.

I'd definitely like to see ctypes. I can agree with the segfault
issue, but I think that some design work would eliminate that.

PyChecker, rather obviously. Likewise I'd like to see something
that would do a decent job of coverage analysis. Neither of the
modules out there at the moment is ready for prime time.

I don't have enough experience with interactive mode to have
an opinion on IPython. What I would like to see is a Python
based shell that could compete with either ksh or Monad.

John Roth




More information about the Python-list mailing list