I think the easiest and most sensible way to address
http://bugs.python.org/issue9353 is to simply remove the __all__
definition from argparse - everything that doesn't start with an
underscore in the module is already meant to be exposed.
But then I wonder - is __all__ considered part of the
On 01/11/2010 14:48, Steven Bethard wrote:
I think the easiest and most sensible way to address
http://bugs.python.org/issue9353 is to simply remove the __all__
definition from argparse - everything that doesn't start with an
underscore in the module is already meant to be exposed.
But then I
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On 01/11/2010 14:48, Steven Bethard wrote:
I think the easiest and most sensible way to address
http://bugs.python.org/issue9353 is to simply remove the __all__
definition from argparse - everything that doesn't
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On 01/11/2010 14:48, Steven Bethard wrote:
I think the easiest and most sensible way to address
http://bugs.python.org/issue9353 is to simply remove the __all__
definition from argparse - everything that doesn't
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
On 01/11/2010 14:48, Steven Bethard wrote:
But then I wonder - is __all__ considered part of the public API of a
module? Or is it okay to
On 01/11/2010 14:57, Guido van Rossum wrote:
[snip...]
Not defining __all__ will mean that from argparse import * will also
export all the modules you import (copy, os, re, sys, textwrap).
Well, the copy of argparse.py that I have carefully renames those to
_copy, _os etc. to avoid this.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:57 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
It is also possible to write automated tests that flag likely missing
symbols in __all__ (as well as symbols in __all__ missing from the
module).
These days, test___all__ checks that everything in __all__ exists in
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 02:55:25PM +, Steven Bethard wrote:
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
Isn't it better to add the missing elements - what is the problem with that
approach?
It just requires extra synchronization, and history shows
