RetroSearch Browse

Thu Aug 11 20:12:41 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-August/112809.html

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:39:52 -0400
Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:

> On Aug 11, 2011, at 04:39 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
> 
> >> * XXX what is the __file__ of a "pure virtual" package?  ``None``?
> >>   Some arbitrary string?  The path of the first directory with a
> >>   trailing separator?  No matter what we put, *some* code is
> >>   going to break, but the last choice might allow some code to
> >>   accidentally work.  Is that good or bad?
> >A pure virtual package having no source file, I think it should have no
> >__file__ at all.  I don’t know if that would break more code than using
> >an empty string for example, but it feels righter.
> 
> I agree that the empty string is the worst of the choices.  no __file__ or
> __file__=None is better.

None should be the answer. It simplifies inspection of module data
(repr(__file__) gives you something recognizable instead of raising)
and makes semantically sense (!) since there is, indeed, no actual file
backing the module.

Regards

Antoine.

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-August/112809.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 402: Simplified Package Layout and Partitioning