我有一个用Python编写的应用程序，它是由相当专业的观众(科学家)使用的。
我正在寻找一个好方法，使应用程序可扩展的用户，即脚本/插件架构。
I am looking for something extremely lightweight. Most scripts, or plugins, are not going to be developed and distributed by a third-party and installed, but are going to be something whipped up by a user in a few minutes to automate a repeating task, add support for a file format, etc. So plugins should have the absolute minimum boilerplate code, and require no 'installation' other than copying to a folder (so something like setuptools entry points, or the Zope plugin architecture seems like too much.)
是否已经有类似的系统存在，或者是否有项目实现了类似的方案，我应该看看想法/灵感?
module_example.py:
def plugin_main(*args, **kwargs):
print args, kwargs
loader.py:
def load_plugin(name):
mod = __import__("module_%s" % name)
return mod
def call_plugin(name, *args, **kwargs):
plugin = load_plugin(name)
plugin.plugin_main(*args, **kwargs)
call_plugin("example", 1234)
它当然是“最小的”，它绝对没有错误检查，可能有无数的安全问题，它不是很灵活-但它应该告诉你一个Python插件系统可以多么简单。
你可能也想看看imp模块，尽管你可以用__import__， os。Listdir和一些字符串操作。
您可以使用pluginlib。
插件很容易创建，并且可以从其他包、文件路径或入口点加载。
创建一个插件父类，定义所需的方法:
import pluginlib
@pluginlib.Parent('parser')
class Parser(object):
@pluginlib.abstractmethod
def parse(self, string):
pass
通过继承父类创建插件:
import json
class JSON(Parser):
_alias_ = 'json'
def parse(self, string):
return json.loads(string)
加载插件:
loader = pluginlib.PluginLoader(modules=['sample_plugins'])
plugins = loader.plugins
parser = plugins.parser.json()
print(parser.parse('{"json": "test"}'))
I am a retired biologist who dealt with digital micrograqphs and found himself having to write an image processing and analysis package (not technically a library) to run on an SGi machine. I wrote the code in C and used Tcl for the scripting language. The GUI, such as it was, was done using Tk. The commands that appeared in Tcl were of the form "extensionName commandName arg0 arg1 ... param0 param1 ...", that is, simple space-separated words and numbers. When Tcl saw the "extensionName" substring, control was passed to the C package. That in turn ran the command through a lexer/parser (done in lex/yacc) and then called C routines as necessary.
操作包的命令可以通过GUI中的窗口逐一运行，但批作业是通过编辑文本文件完成的，这些文本文件是有效的Tcl脚本;您可以选择执行您想要执行的文件级操作的模板，然后编辑一个副本，以包含实际的目录和文件名以及包命令。这招很管用。直到……
1)世界转向了pc, 2)脚本超过了500行，这时Tcl不稳定的组织能力开始成为真正的不便。时间流逝……
我退休了，Python被发明了，它看起来像是Tcl的完美继承者。现在，我从来没有做过移植，因为我从来没有面对过在PC上编译(相当大的)C程序，用C包扩展Python，用Python/Gt?/Tk?/??做gui的挑战。然而，拥有可编辑模板脚本的旧想法似乎仍然可行。此外，以原生Python形式输入包命令也不应该是太大的负担，例如:
packageName.command(arg0, arg1，…， param0, param1，…)
一些额外的点、连号和逗号，但这些都不能阻止表演。
我记得看到有人用Python完成了lex和yacc的版本(请尝试:http://www.dabeaz.com/ply/)，所以如果仍然需要它们，它们就在附近。
本文的重点在于，在我看来，Python本身就是科学家所期望的“轻量级”前端。我很好奇为什么你不这么认为，我是认真的。
后来添加的:应用程序gedit预计会添加插件，他们的网站对一个简单的插件过程有最清晰的解释，我花了几分钟的时间就找到了。试一试:
https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Gedit/PythonPluginHowToOld
I'd still like to understand your question better. I am unclear whether you 1) want scientists to be able to use your (Python) application quite simply in various ways or 2) want to allow the scientists to add new capabilities to your application. Choice #1 is the situation we faced with the images and that led us to use generic scripts which we modified to suit the need of the moment. Is it Choice #2 which leads you to the idea of plugins, or is it some aspect of your application that makes issuing commands to it impracticable?
