Barry A. Warsaw added the comment: On Aug 01, 2012, at 10:44 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>The problem with "path importer" is it's just plain *wrong*. That object is >not an importer and thus calling it one makes it much harder to learn the >finder/loader/importer distinctions correctly. The term "importer" is sufficiently squishy though, and I think we could just as easily adjust the term's definition in the glossary to match what this thing is. >"import finder" is only slightly longer than "importer" and has the huge >advantage of *not being wrong*. The problem is that "import finder" isn't correct either, because this thing doesn't load modules, and it doesn't find imports. It finds loaders through different kinds of finders. It is unquestionably a finder, so probably the most accurate term would be "path finder" but that just didn't read well when I tried to use it. Part of the problem is that "path finder" isn't different enough from "path entry finder" to avoid confusion, and I really like the latter to describe the things that the sys.path_hooks callables return, and I'm sure none of us want to call it the "path entry loader finder finder" :). Keep trying, but so far "path importer" is the least crappy of the lot, IMHO. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15502> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
