2009/7/23 Brett Cannon <br...@python.org>: > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 19:38, Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> > wrote: >> >> 2009/7/23 Brett Cannon <br...@python.org>: >> > None in Python 3.1 is really useless in terms of its semantics in >> > relative >> > imports; importlib doesn't support it and still passes as __import__ (at >> > least last time I ran the test suite that way). I thought we had agreed >> > a >> > while back that supporting None was not warranted in Python 3.0? >> > Otherwise I >> > will do whatever work is necessary for this to happen. >> >> I think it's still nice for the rare cases where you need to trick a >> module into thinking another one doesn't exist. > > But None does not strictly mean "I don't exist". None is supposed to trigger > an another import attempt for the module with a top-level name. It's that > extra import trigger that has no real use in 3.0 and just complicates import > semantics (IMO) needlessly. If you want a module to not exist then you > either stick something else in (e.g. '42') or we remove the special > semantics for None (which I thought we had).
I didn't realize None had other semantics attached to it. (Imagine that dealing with import!) +1 for making it simply indicate an ImportError. -- Regards, Benjamin _______________________________________________ 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
