Thoughts on some stdlib modules
- From: vegetax <vegeta.z@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 05:15:23 -0400
I was messing around in google looking for the available python form
validation modules when i found this:
http://www.jorendorff.com/articles/python/path/, and i realized that is very
similar to my python fileutils module,which encapsulate,path
operations,file operations,etc.
And those thoughts comes to mind again, if python is such a great language
why does the stdlib is so bloated with duplication,bad bad library
design,clumsy to use modules,etc.
Why does people have to put wrappers around about half of the standart
library modules? i have wrappers for urllib,urllib2,urlparse in urlutils.
glob,shutils,os.path,os,filecmp,etc in fileutils.
time,datetime.time,date,datetime.datetime,time.date,etc,etc in DateTime.
And so the list goes on.
I mean is this normal? i dont think so.I havent seen such a messy stdlib in
any language.Is it because of legacy code and backwards compatibility or
because not too much people in the python-dev cares about library design? i
admit the python language design is really really great but the stdlib is
totally forgotten.
Are those issues being considered right now? i cant find any PEP addressing
the issue especifically, at least cooking it for python 3000.
specific topics could be:
grouping related modules.
removing useless legacy modules.
refactoring duplicated functionality.
removing/redesigning poorly written modules.
adding a module versioning system.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Thoughts on some stdlib modules
- From: "Martin v. Löwis"
- Re: Thoughts on some stdlib modules
- From: Ron_Adam
- Re: Thoughts on some stdlib modules
- From: Nick Efford
- Re: Thoughts on some stdlib modules
- Prev by Date: Re: curious problem with large numbers
- Next by Date: Re: doubt regarding Conversion of date into timestamp
- Previous by thread: doubt regarding Conversion of date into timestamp
- Next by thread: Re: Thoughts on some stdlib modules
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|