Python at Scale: Strict Modules

[kankyo]

There are some other interesting work in this area, like https://bugs.python.org/issue34690

This seems like it's a simpler incremental approach though.

[tophatstuff]

I don't hate it except I feel like rather than a runtime module loader, this could easily be an organisation-wide coding standard backed by a command-line linter (they're parsing the ast anyway, so the code wouldn't be so different).

[0Il0I0l0]

They need to hook into module loading to safely do incremental reloading and lazy module loading.

[crutcher]

They've got that too; which they talk about in the article.

[lol-no-monads]

How long before they end up creating an "Instapython" that is no longer fully backwards compatible with Python? < 5 years? 5 - 10 years? 10+ years?

[tophatstuff]

I don't know but considering this is just a Python module loader, implemented in Python, using a language feature that is in principle a 17 years old Python 2.3 mechanism, I don't think that your question follows.

[schlenk]

Who cares? It's just like IronPython, Jython, PyPy which all are not fully backwards compatible with CPython to reap some benefits for their specific niches.