Ronald Oussoren <ronaldousso...@mac.com> added the comment:
Note that I will have to special case namespaces like typing.re anyway in my code, being a namespace that does not correspond to a "real" module whose code I can analyse. #35791 was mostly about 3th-party code like apipkg that are "real" modules, but for some reason effectively erase there __spec__ attribute. In those cases find_spec could return valid value. As I mentioned in the other issue I have a simple workaround for this, and that's something I'll have to keep around for a while anyway. I'm not convinced at this point that anything needs to be changed, as long as the documentation is clear on the requirement that modules should have a __spec__ attribute (which makes it easier to convince 3th-party authors to update their code). Special cases like typing.re will always be special, and adding __spec__ to them won't change a lot there (the only vaguely useful attribute in the ModuleSpec for typing.re would be "name" and "parent") and IMHO would be needless code churn. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue35806> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
