Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #24837 > unrolled thread

Re: Why site-packages?

Started byIan Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
First post2012-07-03 16:04 -0600
Last post2012-07-03 16:04 -0600
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: Why site-packages? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2012-07-03 16:04 -0600

#24837 — Re: Why site-packages?

FromIan Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date2012-07-03 16:04 -0600
SubjectRe: Why site-packages?
Message-ID<mailman.1764.1341353116.4697.python-list@python.org>
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> wrote:
> If it was intended to be reusable code, I'd think it -should- go in
> site-packages.
>
> But so much code in site-packages isn't intended to be reusable.

Can you give some examples?  Looking through my site-packages
directory, everything in there is either used by multiple applications
or at least has the potential to be.  Frankly, if you've installed a
third-party package and written your own code against it, even if only
in one little script, isn't that already reuse?

> And even for stuff that's reusable, there are advantages to just duplicating
> them for the purposes of each application, because you never know when one
> of them is going to need a different version from another.

Definitely a situation for virtualenv, IMO.

>> The site module has to process any .pth files in the site-packages,
>> but apart from that, I think the actual amount of stuff in
>> site-packages should be irrelevant.
>
> Irrelevant to what?   More stuff in site slowing things down?  Are .pth's
> not correlated with more stuff in site-packages?  Aren't they actually a
> thing In site?

Yes, but I just don't expect the .pth files to grow that fast.  I've
got something like 30 packages in my site-packages and only 6 .pth
files, and most of those are one-liners.

Right now this all seems highly speculative to me.  I think it might
be informative, either to you or to me, to do an actual timing test.
Why don't you try setting up two side-by-side installations of Python,
one with all the site-packages cruft, and one trimmed down to only
what you think should be in there, and see if you can measure a real
difference in startup time?

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python


csiph-web