Modules for inclusion in standard library?

Gregory Piñero gregpinero at gmail.com
Wed Jun 29 13:06:16 CEST 2005


I'd like to see some database API's to the most common databases
included.  It would make Python much more useful for web development. 
I've come across situations where a web host supports python and
supports MySQL yet it's taken me days to get the MySQLAPI installed
with running setup in my home directory etc.  And I don't know what
options you have if you don't have shell access?

It definately seems to me that some API's to popular database would be
conducive to a "batteries included" approach.

-Greg

On 6/29/05, Thomas Heller <theller at python.net> wrote:
> Simon Brunning <simon.brunning at gmail.com > writes:
> 
> > On 6/28/05, John Roth <newsgroups at jhrothjr.com > wrote:
> >> I'd definitely like to see ctypes. I can agree with the segfault
> >> issue, but I think that some design work would eliminate that.
> >
> > I'm not sure that it would. Ctypes allows you, as one colleague
> > memorably put it, to "poke the operating system with a stick". You are
> > always going to be able to use ctypes to provoke spectacular crashes
> > of the kind that you can never get with 'ordinary' Python.
> 
> Right.
> 
> > Having said that, I'd like to see ctypes in the standard library
> > anyway, with a suitably intimidating warning in the docs about the
> > trouble you can get yourself into with it.
> 
> To me, this sounds that *at least* a PEP would be needed to convince
> Guido.  Or, to record the reasoning why it cannot be included.
> 
> Thomas
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list 
>



More information about the Python-list mailing list