Re: PEP 420: Implicit Namespace Packages

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 6:18 AM, Eric V. Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> This reflects (I hope!) the discussions at PyCon. My plan is to produce
> an implementation based on the importlib code, and then flush out pieces
> of the PEP.
>
> In particular, I want to make sure the PEP addresses the various
> objections that were raised, especially by Nick.

One other thing I noticed: "There is no mechanism to recompute the
__path__ once a namespace package has been created."

This isn't really true - pkgutil.extend_path() can still be used to
update a namespace package path. Perhaps change it to:

"There is no mechanism to automatically recompute the __path__ if
sys.path is altered after a namespace package has already been
created. However, existing namespace utilities (like
pkgutil.extend_path()) can be used to update them explicitly if
desired."

Also, as a general matter of readability, adding double backticks
around attributes, functions and filenames to get them displayed in
monospace can be quite helpful.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   [email protected]   |   Brisbane, Australia