Just van Rossum <just@letterror.com> writes:
> This is all only half true. sys.path_importer_cache is exposed so
> you can *clear* it in case you install a path hook that should take
> over sys.path items that may already have a handler. To only
> partially clear it is advanced usage. By no means you're supposed to
> *add* to sys.path_importer_cache explicitly, as someone after you
> may clear it again, and then you're hosed if there's no proper path
> hook.
Whoo. I was thinking about how I'd simulate the (now unavailable)
feature of adding importers directly to sys.path. It took me virtually
no time at all to come up with
importer = MyImporter(...)
imp_id = str(id(importer)) # A cookie
sys.path.append(imp_id)
sys.path_importer_cache[imp_id] = importer
The only way I could come up with of doing the same thing without
messing with sys.path_importer_cache was by implementing my own
equivalent - basically
id_cache = {}
def id_factory(id):
try:
return id_cache[id]
except KeyError:
raise ImportError
sys.path_hooks.append(id_factory)
importer = MyImporter(...)
imp_id = str(id(importer)) # A cookie
sys.path.append(imp_id)
id_cache[imp_id] = importer
I can't think of any reason why this is *intrinsically* better than
the first way other than because someone may clear the cache on
you. And it's certainly not as intuitive.
> I also disagree that adding an importer to sys.path_importer_cache
> would always be *easier* than doing it the right way by adding a
> hook to sys.path_hooks.
Hmm. See above. OK, so that's generic code, and specific cases may
always be easier to code "the right way".
> If would be somewhat easier for "cookie" path items, but I think in
> 99% of these cases a path-less importer on sys.meta_path would work
> just as well.
But sys.meta_path happens *before* sys.path. It's entirely likely that
a cookie item might want to run *after* sys.path. For that we need
"stage 2", where the real sys.path importer is a proper item on
sys.meta_path.
At the moment, whether sys.meta_path should run before or after
sys.path is a judgement call - which usage is more common? In the
longer term, the normal insert(0) vs append() approach gives both
options.
Disclaimer: As usual, this is all theory. Real use cases take
precedence.
Paul.
PS Jim's comments have now raised two (as far as I can recall) issues
with the proposed hook mechanism which should be documented in the
"Open Issues" section of the PEP:
1. sys.meta_path allows hooks to be added *before* sys.path
processing, but there is no equivalent facility for hooks
*after* sys.path (response: either wait for "phase 2" or use a
cookie at the end of sys.path).
2. There is no easy way of "stacking" hooks (response: there isn't
one now, either, so that's not a critical issue).
--
This signature intentionally left blank
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