Re: Replacement PEP for namespace packages

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 08:04, Eric V. Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 04/09/2012 07:22 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
>
> > How is it going with the PEP?
>
> I'm reviewing the email threads from the last round of discussions,
> making sure I have everything covered. I hope to have a draft early next
> week.
>
> > (The reason I'm asking is because we want to backport the accepted
> > approach to 3.2 and start using it...)
>
> Our plan is to wait until Brett merges importlib as the default import
> mechanism, so that we can work entirely (or at least mostly) in Python.
>

That should be happening soon. Keep an eye on python-dev for an email about
it once the patch lands (have one more thing to work out in default and
then use in my branch before it can land).


> Any port to 3.2 is going to be an entirely separate effort, all in C.
> But I support it!
>

I don't think it necessarily has to be that way. If you either use your own
importer or override builtins.__import__ with importlib.__import__ and
tweak some things under the hood you can actually match behaviour at a
roughly 5% import performance cost compared to what 3.3 will have for
import.

-Brett


>
> Eric.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Import-SIG mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/import-sig
>

_______________________________________________
Import-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/import-sig