Re: latest update of PEP 451

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Brett Cannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Eric Snow <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> On Sep 25, 2013 7:05 AM, "Brett Cannon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:46 AM, Eric Snow <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>
>
> [SNIP]
>>
>> >> .. [lazy_import_concerns]
>> >> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-August/128129.html
>> >
>> >
>> > I should mention that this PEP will actually improve the situation for
>> > lazy loading compared to how it is in Python 3.3 when using
>> > __getattribute__. Because import now tries to backfill attributes like
>> > __package__ and __loader__, any module that is lazy based on attribute
>> > access automatically gets loaded by import itself. But with this PEP we can
>> > change import's semantics to not do that with spec-loaded modules and thus
>> > loader.exec_module() can insert a lazy module into sys.modules and know that
>> > it's attributes won't be touched unless you do a ``from ... import`` on it.
>>
>> Yeah, I'm mostly focused on addressing concerns.  Would a lazy load
>> example be worth adding to the PEP?
>
>
> If it you don't think it will detract from the rest of the PEP it wouldn't
> hurt. If you want I can write up some rough code to demonstrate how it would
> work.

Meh.  I'll add it if needed, but will hold off otherwise.  I don't
think it will add that much to the PEP.  It's not that different from
what you can already do with the loader.

-eric