On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:18, Georg Brandl <g.bra...@gmx.net> wrote: > Am 24.01.2011 20:04, schrieb Raymond Hettinger: >> Looking at http://docs.python.org/dev/library/html.html#module-html it would >> appear that we've created a new module with a single trivial function. >> >> In reality, there was already a python package, html, that served to group >> two loosely related modules, html.parser and html.entities. >> >> ISTM, that if we're going to use python packages as "namespace containers" >> for categorizing modules, then the top level __init__ namespace should be >> left empty. >> >> Before the placement of html.escape() becomes set in stone, I think we should >> consider putting it somewhere else. > > To be honest, I don't see the issue. I don't see stdlib packages as > "namespace containers", but rather as a nice way of structuring functionality. > And remember that flat is better than nested -- why should escape() be put > away into a new submodule?
Importlib also acts as a precedent with importlib.import_module(). I honestly don't feel the need to treat packages as a namespace explicitly (but then again I also disagree with the argument that __init__.py needs to be left empty). _______________________________________________ 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
