Hi Carl! On 6 Aug., 04:18, Carl Witty <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Simon King <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think it is easier to do > > from sage.all import ZZ > > instead of providing its exact location (from sage.rings.integer...). > > > Moreover, using sage.all is more stable, because the exact location of > > things can change (so that "from sage.rings...." would break), but > > "from sage.all" will still work. > > > I don't know if "from sage.all import *" works, but I guess it is not > > recommended to load such a huge amount of things if you just need few > > of them. > > This probably won't work for code that goes into the Sage library -- > at least, for code that is somehow exposed in sage.all.
"Into Sage library" is no problem per se. "Into sage.all": I think that circular import can indeed be a problem. But if the things that you import are only needed inside methods, then you could put the relevant import statement inside these methods. In that way, if I am not mistaken, the circle is broken. Cheers, Simon -- To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
