[py-dev] Future export interface

[holger krekel]

Hi David, 

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 08:12 -0400, David Stanek wrote:
> I want to get my hands a little dirty by playing with the
> export/import changes that are in the future document. The example
> of the new specification looks like:
> 
>   from py import pkg
>   pkg.export(__name__,
>           pkg.Class('local', 'doc comment', extpy='./path/local.LocalPath'),
>           pkg.Class('svnurl', 'doc comment',
>               extpy='./path/local/svn/urlcommand.SvnUrlPath'),
>       ),
>   # it goes on ...
>   )
> 
> I was thinking about how this would look a little and I am unsure of it.
> 
> The keyword arguments that are currently passed to initpkg are missing
> from the example and adding them in to the export call may look clumsy.
> I was thinking of something like:
> 
>   from py import pkg
>   exporter = pkg.Exporter(__name__, description, version, url, etc...)
>   exporter.exportModule('path', 'doc comment',
>       pkg.Class('local', 'doc comment', extpy='./path/local.Localpath'),
>       pkg.Class('svnurl', 'doc comment',
>           extpy='./path/local/svn/urlcommand.SvnUrlPath'),
>       # more exported classes
>   )
>   exporter.exportModule('junk', 'doc comment',
>       pkg.Module('stuff', 'doc comment',
>           pkg.Class('Stuff', 'comment')
>       )
>   )
> 
> That is an attempt to flatten the data structure and make it more
> readable.

That's basically interesting but i think we shouldn't work on that 
before the 0.8 release is out.  However, after the current import/export 
mechanisms seems to be be pretty stable i am more hesitant to go 
after a big scale change. Just going for a minimal way to add docstrings 
to the current dictionary-based export specification seems more worthwhile. 

Side note: I am still heading towards getting an issue tracker up for
organizing the remaining issues before the release. 

cheers, 

    holger