Message 202663 - Python tracker

Message202663

Author	ncoghlan
Recipients	Arfrever, berker.peksag, brett.cannon, eric.snow, larry, ncoghlan
Date	2013-11-11.23:59:59
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<CADiSq7eEV+1XDUh-q5SLHvKhHTbFBgxK+CY_+8dnQ3p=hguqdw@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to	<CADiSq7cOYfq7C98C5q4-Rcsoj3DNL=g4F0GE9-GTp35Av19Z6g@mail.gmail.com>

Content
And coming full circle: there's no harm in letting finders reject loading into a target module, and that's orthogonal to having loaders reject it. It's just that loaders that want to do that will currently still need to implement load_module. That means the only thing we need to postpone is the load_module deprecation, since it still covers at least one advanced use case the new API doesn't handle.

Content

And coming full circle: there's no *harm* in letting finders reject loading
into a target module, and that's orthogonal to having loaders reject it.
It's just that loaders that want to do that will currently still need to
implement load_module.

That means the only thing we need to postpone is the load_module
deprecation, since it still covers at least one advanced use case the new
API doesn't handle.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2013-11-11 23:59:59	ncoghlan	set	recipients: + ncoghlan, brett.cannon, larry, Arfrever, eric.snow, berker.peksag
2013-11-11 23:59:59	ncoghlan	link	issue18864 messages
2013-11-11 23:59:59	ncoghlan	create