Ethan Furman wrote: > The strongest reason for not doing this is that it pollutes the current > namespace, not that it obliterates the 'pkg' namespace.
Sorry, I phrased that badly. When I said "obliterates the 'pkg' namespace" I was referring to dumping the 'pkg' namespace into the current namespace (polluting it, as you would say). > How would that be different from > --> import pkg Because that does not import all of the (public) modules and packages under 'pkg'. For example scipy has has a subpackage 'linalg'. If I just do 'import scipy' then I can not refer to 'scipy.linalg' until I do 'import scipy.linalg'. Steven D'Aprano wrote: > By the way, this sort of question should probably go to the python-ideas > mailing list for any extended discussion. Sorry, didn't realize that would be the more appropriate list. Thanks, Brendan _______________________________________________ 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
