On 8/1/10 6:51 AM, in article
aanlktik-mkenwtpsmfpcymd6enypb8un+qwqzj=ug...@mail.gmail.com, "Fredrik
Lundh" <fred...@pythonware.com> wrote:
> 2010/8/1 Jerome Leclanche <adys...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Although the "PIL" and "Image*" packages themselves do not
>> respect python standards (should be from imaging import .., or
>> something alike).
>
> If you had been paying attention, you'd noticed that "python
> standards" change all the time, depend on what the latest minibosses
> think (suggestion: look up old versions of PEP 8 before you post stuff
> about how others ignore the "standards").
This is good to know, thank you! (And, thank you Jerome and Daniel for your
feedback).
So if I understand you correctly, Fredrik, you are saying that you are
adhering to what was once a standard and that you are skeptical about new
standards (which is certainly reasonable).
Regardless of standards, if I understand things correctly, some code
supports:
import Image
While other code requires:
from PIL import Image
To work properly.
So, we have a "human" problem. If everyone could agree on a single format
and to update all their code we could move forward (also a logistical
problem).
Alex
>
> </F>
> _______________________________________________
> Image-SIG maillist - Image-SIG@python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig
>
--
Alex Clark · http://aclark.net
Author Plone 3.3 Site Administration · http://aclark.net/admin
_______________________________________________
Image-SIG maillist - Image-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig
