On 2020-01-11 10:30 p.m., Juancarlo Añez wrote:
The biggest difference is that scripts can't do relative imports. So
here's a counter-proposal: Allow "from . import modulename" to import
"modulename.py" from the directory that contains the script that
Python first executed (or, for interactive Python, the current
directory as Python started).
Understanding "script" as a free standing ".py"...
I loved your suggestion because of it's convenience, but I worry it
could be a security hole. I have scripts in ~/bin, in ./bin, and in
./scripts.
And for ./scripts, it would be most useful if `from .. import` was
allowed, so there was no more `import sys; sys.path.insert(0, '.').
I believe the above is addressed on a PEP (which number I don't remember).
The discussion that has followed validates the OP's concern (even if
the originally proposed solution is not right).
there is nothing "wrong" with it. you just don't like the tradeoffs I
picked.
It's hard to write scripts in Python that have access to the modules
they intuitively should have access to, without patching
(`sys.path.insert(...)` is awful)
--
Juancarlo *Añez*
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/UDG4GRHXQYXR4LYHEHP5EGEQAOECHZZC/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/AFORRL5V6T7Z3GG7PAMEKJAWC2GN3JXJ/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
