On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Michael Foord <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> wrote: > Along with the others +1
I agree with keeping these distinct and orthogonal as well. > What is more important is that we have a clearly stated policy for new > modules and adding names to existing modules so that we don't have to repeat > this debate in five years time. Agreed again. > My suggestion, which fits in with the use of __all__ by the language and > also the convention widely in use by the community already boils down to: > > * If __all__ exists it is definitive I think this is overly vague. :-) Specifically, if something is mentioned in __all__, it's public. Non-inclusion in __all__ doesn't imply privateness. > * Names with leading underscores are private unless in __all__ (and if you > want to export leading underscore names as part of a public API you should > define __all__ or "import *" won't export them) We shouldn't confuse non-export via "import *" with non-public, however. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> "A storm broke loose in my mind." --Albert Einstein _______________________________________________ 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
