Re: PEP 489: Multi-phase extension module initialization; version 5

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 May 2015 19:35:57 +0200
> Petr Viktorin <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Correct. This is not the PEP you're looking for.
>>
>> Originally we did want to solve this problem, and I guess wording that
>> suggests it's solved might still be around. Is that the case? Should I
>> clarify that the problem is not yet solved?
>
> The following wording in the PEP:
>
> """This PEP proposes a redesign of the way in which built-in and
> extension modules interact with the import machinery. This was last
> revised for Python 3.0 in PEP 3121 , but did not solve all problems at
> the time. The goal is to solve them by bringing extension modules
> closer to the way Python modules behave; specifically to hook into the
> ModuleSpec-based loading mechanism introduced in PEP 451 ."""
>
> suggests that it will indeed help overcome the issues with PEP 3121. It
> turns out it doesn't, except in one specific case (i.e. Cython).

Ah, the abstract. My eyes must have glazed over, and I didn't expand
"PEP 3121" when re-reading it. I'll reword this.

Thanks for noticing, and sorry for the confusion!