prabhu_r at users.sf.net
Mon Nov 8 03:24:21 CST 2004
>>>>> "AB" == Arnd Baecker <arnd.baecker at web.de> writes:
AB> Hi Prabhu, On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Prabhu Ramachandran wrote:
>> why not save everything in a dictionary with the keys being the
>> fully-qualified module name or alternatively the full path to
>> the file? If you want more fine-grained docs, you could nest
>> dictionaries within the dictionary. This is extremely easy to
>> deal with programmatically
AB> This sounds very appealing, and a simple pickle would allow
AB> storing/reading. Presumably one has to store every time
AB> something was added to make sure that on a crash newly added
AB> information is not lost. Then one has to find a way to get
AB> new texts from the editor into the dictonary. And also the
AB> other way round when one wants to make changes to an existing
AB> entry this has to be passed on to the editor. In both cases a
AB> temporary file might be needed. Maybe I am seeing
AB> complications where there aren't any, but this is definitively
AB> worth discussing.
Ahh, I did not realize the problem with the text editor. That is a
good enough point to shelve the dictionary.
>> and *to me* seems to solve some of your problems.
AB> Maybe I am missing something here, but from my point of view
AB> the only remaining problem is to get a unique path to
AB> `ufuncs`. I don't see how storing in a dictionary will
AB> overcome this - sorry if I am just blind.
Well, what if the version changes, or the path to the file changes
(like you install the default rpm/deb and then upgraded to a source
install in /usr/local) or if the version of Python changes. But then
again if you made the paths using only module names rather than the
__file__ then this would work fine I guess.
AB> There is another reason why I like the file-based approach:
AB> one can easily make additions, even after the end of a python
AB> session, just using the editor. One could also think of using
AB> ReST with "links" to figures which one could easily put into
AB> the corresponding directory. Somehow I feel that by this such
AB> notes could grow more easily than with the dictionary
AB> To elaborate a bit more on the `ufunc` problem:
Yes, that is a problem. /the only solution I know is to use a separate
ufunc directory and treat all names as common to anything that is a
ufunc. Is there any reason numarray's cos function will be documented
any different from Numeric's?
BTW, instead of using the full path why not strip everything before
the site-packages (for the __file__) because it eliminates the problem
with versioning and relocating the package to /usr/local etc.
More information about the Scipy-dev