>>>>> "BAW" == Barry A Warsaw <barry@zope.com> writes:
>>>>> "PR" == Prabhu Ramachandran <prabhu@aero.iitm.ernet.in> writes:
PR> (1) Re-nesting a package is a pain. What I mean by re-nesting
[Re-nesting packages contrived example]
BAW> Why would you want to do that? Why not just keep them
BAW> separate top-level packages that cooperate? Or export A's
BAW> names in B's modules? I think distutils helps out here
BAW> because it's now easy to install A in a way that B could just
BAW> use, or add to.
Umm, that was a contrived example so might not be very sensible. For
a more realistic one I think I'll pass the question on to Eric. I
think Eric did mention his difficulty with SciPy here:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2001-November/071794.html
<snip>
BAW> Why does B have to add packages to A's namespace? Why can't
BAW> the B author simply use distutils to ensure that vanilla A is
BAW> installed, import the bits and pieces of A that you want to
BAW> expose, overriding what you want to change, and export an
BAW> interface through B that clients can use instead of A?
BAW> I.e. through the use of "from foo import bar" and "from foo
BAW> import bar as baz", you can present whatever public interface
BAW> you want, through B's namespace, and mimic as much or as
BAW> little of A's as you want.
Ture, its possible to do things and work around situations with the
current scheme. I guess I need to come up with something that
definitively proves my point. Will think about it. Maybe Gordon has
a better/more convincing argument? I think Michel Pelletier also had
a different point of view on this.
PR> Its not the application that I'm concerned about - an
PR> application is typically a single/few file(s) and editing them
PR> to suit things is certainly not an issue.
BAW> Well, not /all/ applications!
Indeed. I guess I caused confusion here. I was talking of my
particular application where I ran into problems with re-nesting and
too much typing I was referring to that. I certainly don't intend
changing every single application when there is no need for that.
PR> So do I need to write a PEP? Is there some special
PR> formality/format I need to keep in mind?
BAW> PEP 1 and PEP 9 are your guidelines to proper PEP form and
BAW> procedure.
Thanks. Will look at them.
prabhu
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4