* Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 4/26/06, André Malo <nd at perlig.de> wrote:
> > * Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > > So I have a very simple proposal: keep the __init__.py requirement
> > > for top-level pacakages, but drop it for subpackages. This should be
> > > a small change. I'm hesitant to propose *anything* new for Python
> > > 2.5, so I'm proposing it for 2.6; if Neal and Anthony think this
> > > would be okay to add to 2.5, they can do so.
> >
> > Not that it would count in any way, but I'd prefer to keep it. How
> > would I mark a subdirectory as "not-a-package" otherwise?
>
> What's the use case for that? Have you run into this requirement? And
> even if you did, was there a requirement that the subdirectory's name
> be the same as a standard library module? If the subdirectory's name
> is not constrained, the easiest way to mark it as a non-package is to
> put a hyphen or dot in its name; if you can't do that, at least name
> it something that you don't need to import.
Actually I have no problems with the change from inside python, but from the
POV of tools, which walk through the directories, collecting/separating
python packages and/or supplemental data directories. It's an explicit vs.
implicit issue, where implicit would mean "kind of heuristics" from now on.
IMHO it's going to break existing stuff [1] and should at least not be done
in such a rush.
nd
[1] Well, it does break some of mine ;-)
--
Da fällt mir ein, wieso gibt es eigentlich in Unicode kein
"i" mit einem Herzchen als Tüpfelchen? Das wär sooo süüss!
-- Björn Höhrmann in darw
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