On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 12:47 AM, Thomas Kluyver <tho...@kluyver.me.uk> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 24, 2018, at 7:19 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> What do you think? (Thomas, I'd love your thoughts in particular :-).) > > I agree that it looks nicer, but I'm not sure that it's worth the added > complexity: is 'flit' equivalent to 'flit.__build_api__' (i.e. from flit > import __build_api__), or to 'flit:__build_api__' (import flit and get an > attribute called __build_api__)?
I'd say the latter (flit:__build_api__). It doesn't make much difference in practice, because if you do want to make it a submodule, then flit/__init__.py can just do 'from . import __build_api__' (or 'from . import buildapi as __build_api__'). And this only affects build system designers, who already have to jump through a bunch of small but slightly fiddly hoops -- it's sort of inherent in implementing this kind of API. > For Flit, I treat the buildsystem table as boilerplate, and 'flit init' > inserts it automatically. So the extra word in 'flit.buildapi' is a very > minor inconvenience. Yes, but pyproject.toml is something that every python dev will be looking at on a regular basis, and "Beautiful is better than ugly". (What does 'flit init' do if someone already has a pyproject.toml, by the way?) -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org -- Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mm3/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/mm3/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/TOR6IFKGNSYQJY6HMSMNZXTZH77EMJPT/
