Guido van Rossum wrote: >> PEP 328: Absolute/Relative Imports > > Yes, please.
+0 for adding relative imports. -1 for raising errors for in-package relative imports using the current notation in Python 2.6. See: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-September/048695.html for a previous discussion. The PEP still doesn't have any mention of the above discussion or later follow-ups. The main argument is that the strategy to make absolute imports mandatory and offer relative imports as work-around breaks the possibility to produce packages that work in e.g. Python 2.4 and 2.6, simply because Python 2.4 doesn't support the needed relative import syntax. The only strategy left would be to use absolute imports throughout, which isn't all that bad, except when it comes to relocating a package or moving a set of misc. modules into a package - which is not all that uncommon in larger projects, e.g. to group third-party top-level modules into a package to prevent cluttering up the top-level namespace or to simply make a clear distinction in your code that you are relying on a third-party module, e.g from thirdparty import tool I don't mind having to deal with a warning for these, but don't want to see this raise an error before Py3k. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Source (#1, Feb 10 2006) >>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ... http://www.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ... http://zope.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ... http://python.egenix.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ ::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,FreeBSD for free ! :::: _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
