I don't have a particular solution mind. Just wanted to reframe the question
to be a more general one about the controlling the selection between near
equivalent modules and extensions. Some variant of the problem seems to
come-up in many different contexts. No one best practice has emerged as
dominant.
----- Original Message -----
From: Brett Cannon
To: Raymond Hettinger
Cc: Python Dev
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Choosing a best practice solution for
Python/extensionmodules
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:33, Raymond Hettinger <pyt...@rcn.com> wrote:
[Brett]
With io getting rewritten as an extension module, I think it's time to
try to come up with a good best practice scenario for how to be able to control
when a module uses a pure Python implementation and when it uses extension
module optimizations. This is really only important for testing as if the
extension is missing then the pure Python version is just flat-out used.
There is also need in some modules where the two are not exactly equivalent
or where there are multiple C extensions to choose from. In PyYAML, there
needs to be an easier way to switch parsers and emitters (i.e. LibYAML).
There are similar issues with xmlrpclib with the choice of parsers,
marshallers,
and unmarshallers. Possibly, the same mechanism can offer the user more
control over which dbm is used when there are several choices.
So are you saying you want something that takes multiple arguments like
``use_extension(py_name, *ext_names)``? Or are you wanting to go down the road
of modules needing to define their own functions to use or unwind changes?
-Brett
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
