Just van Rossum wrote: > Martin v. L=F6wis wrote: >=20 >=20 >>"M.-A. Lemburg" <mal@lemburg.com> writes: >> >> >>>But why store the import objects in sys.path and not in >>>some auxilliary dictionary instead ? >> >>What would be the advantage of doing so? >> >>And, if this is done: How can I add my own custom import mechanism to >>sys.path? The machinery to replace strings in sys.path is only >>available for zip files, all other hooks must add their objects to >>sys.path directly. >=20 >=20 > +1 >=20 > With MAL's idea you'd need to write >=20 > p =3D ... > sys.importers[p] =3D myimporter(p) > sys.path.append(p) Hmm, I was thinking of: sys.register_importer(myimporter) sys.path.append(p) myimporter would then either be asked for a suitable suffix or prefix to use in matching or the importer would simply call myimporter.match() during the sys.path scan. > instead of >=20 > sys.path.append(myimporter(p)) Sounds like the classical "you need one more line than me" argument ;-) --=20 Marc-Andre Lemburg CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH _______________________________________________________________________ eGenix.com -- Makers of the Python mx Extensions: mxDateTime,mxODBC,... Python Consulting: http://www.egenix.com/ Python Software: http://www.egenix.com/files/python/
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