[issue36701] module 'urllib' has no attribute 'request'

[Brett Cannon]

Brett Cannon  added the comment:

I'm -1 on pulling `request` up to implicitly be part of the `urllib` namespace 
without an import. `os.path` is the only exception that I know of in the stdlib 
and that's historical (it predates packages existing in the language). 
Otherwise the proposed change is suggesting that we automatically import all 
submodules to the top of a package which is expensive (as Martin pointed out), 
and simply not how Python's import is meant to be used.

And the statement that "`request` is part of `urllib`" is true today, just like 
saying any submodule is part of a package. If that wording is confusing then a 
PR to tweak the wording could be considered.

Since there are 3 core devs who are against this idea I'm closing this as "not 
a bug". Thanks for the idea regardless, Piyush!

--
resolution:  -> not a bug
stage:  -> resolved
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue36701] module 'urllib' has no attribute 'request'

[Raymond Hettinger]

Change by Raymond Hettinger :


--
nosy: +brett.cannon

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue36701] module 'urllib' has no attribute 'request'

[Martin Panter]

Martin Panter  added the comment:

The “urllib” package also contains “urllib.parse”, which is a lot more 
lightweight than “urllib.request”. In a quick experiment, importing 
“urllib.request” is more than 2 times slower than importing “urllib.parse” on 
its own. And importing “urllib” by itself is not much faster, so I guess a lot 
of the time is unavoidable Python startup, and “urllib.request” is probably 
many times slower than “urllib.parse”.

The reason for the slowness is the dependencies and initialization. The 
“urllib.parse” module only imports a few commonly-used modules. On the other 
hand, importing “urllib.request” imports many heavyweight high-level modules 
directly and indirectly (email submodules in particular, also things like SSL, 
multithreading, HTTP client, temporary files). Some of these dependencies also 
compile lots of regular expressions at import time.

The slowdown can be a problem for things like command-line programs. Just today 
I found “circusd --help” on a Raspberry Pi took ~5 s to produce output.

The case of “os.path” is different: it isn’t a submodule of “os”. It is just a 
pointer to “posixpath”, “ntpath”, etc, depending on “os.name”.

--
nosy: +martin.panter

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue36701] module 'urllib' has no attribute 'request'

[Berker Peksag]

Berker Peksag  added the comment:

What about other packages in the stdlib? For example, you can see the same 
behavior in the email package:

>>> import email
>>> email.message.EmailMessage()
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "", line 1, in 
AttributeError: module 'email' has no attribute 'message'

IMO, this is how imports work in Python and IIRC os.path is the only exception 
in the stdlib. I think this needs to be discussed on python-ideas first.

--
nosy: +berker.peksag

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue36701] module 'urllib' has no attribute 'request'

[Senthil Kumaran]

Senthil Kumaran  added the comment:

I vaguely recollect the reason for this. It was done with the translation of 
Python2 code (which had urllib, urllib2, and urlparse, robotparser) etc, 
combined into a single package. We wanted to keep the import as urllib.request 
and urllib.response, and urllib.parse

That said. If there is no other request currently open for this. Let's keep 
this, and am +1 to this suggestion. We have to think if there are any potential 
drawbacks for the old code which is already using 2nd level import.

--
nosy: +orsenthil

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue36701] module 'urllib' has no attribute 'request'

[Piyush]

New submission from Piyush :

The current way to use one of `urllib.request` APIs is like this:
```
import urllib.request
urllib.request.urlretrieve
```

Can we change this to:
```
import urllib
urllib.request.urlretrieve
```
This will require adding 1 line at 
https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/Lib/urllib/__init__.py

This is required because help on `urllib` says that `request` is part of 
`urllib` suggesting that `urllib.request` should be available if I `import 
urllib`.
Moreover `import urllib.request` is not at all intuitive.

I can submit a PR if other's think what I'm proposing makes sense.

--
files: Screen Shot 2019-04-23 at 11.22.48 AM.png
messages: 340690
nosy: piyush-kgp
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: module 'urllib' has no attribute 'request'
versions: Python 3.6
Added file: https://bugs.python.org/file48283/Screen Shot 2019-04-23 at 
11.22.48 AM.png

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com