I totally agree with that. Though, I just read up, if pierreth is trying to borrow code from app1/modules inside app2/controllers, then injecting app1/modules into the python path should work. Of course, this would just avoid having to put the module code inside app2/ modules (and would provide the ability inside the app2 controller to use "import moudleA").
I do not rely on the technique (I use local_import), I just had an idea with respect to this situation. On Apr 6, 11:14 am, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: > On Apr 6, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Mathew Grabau wrote: > > > > > It is not, strictly speaking, specific to web2py - it is specific to > > any python script that uses the convention of calling into (executing > > directory)/applications/app/modules/ for an import. It applies to > > web2py, but web2py is breaking none of the rules there. > > > There are other ways to figure that out. > > > You can add to your python path (when executing under web2py): (web2py- > > dir)/applications/myapp/modules. > > > With that in your python path (under web2py) it works. > > The reason this is problematical is that it exposes each modules directory to > the other web2py applications. For many (most?) cases that won't be a > problem, but if there are conflicting module names it won't work--that's why > local_import exists, yes? > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 6, 10:43 am, pierreth <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yes, this is working. "applications" is in the path. But using > >> "applications.yourappname.modules.modulename" is specific to web2py. > >> Python developers are expecting to do "import modulename" otherwise, > >> it will not work outside of web2py. > > >> On 6 avr, 10:55, [email protected] wrote: > > >>> Importing from modules works with absolute import , you must use > > >>> import applications.yourappname.modules.modulename > > >>> The path has been set to the directory that web2py is running in - where > >>> the web2py.py file is. > >>> Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on the MTS High Speed Mobility Network > > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: pierreth <[email protected]> > > >>> Sender: [email protected] > >>> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 07:39:47 > >>> To: web2py-users<[email protected]> > >>> Reply-To: [email protected] > >>> Subject: [web2py] Re: Modularity > > >>> Here are my conclusion on using the "modules" directory. > > >>> What is working: > > >>> - Using local_import avoid collisions of modules or packages that may > >>> have the same names in other applications. > >>> - Explicit and implicit relative imports are working well for modules > >>> located in the "modules" directory. > > >>> What is not working: > > >>> - Absolute imports does not work because "modules" is not in the > >>> Python path. > > >>> What this mean in practice: > > >>> - Modules located in "modules" can import each other if there are not > >>> located in a package. This is implicit relative import. > >>> - local_import is working well with both modules and packages. > >>> - Modules located in "modules", regardless of if they are or not > >>> located in a package, can only import other modules located both in a > >>> package and in "modules" using explicit relative imports. Absolute > >>> imports only work for modules and packages located in the Python path. > > >>> So if you drop both a module "a" depending on module "b" in "modules", > >>> they will probably work very well. But if you drop both a package "a" > >>> depending on package "b" (or a module "b"), it will probably not work. > >>> Using relative imports in this case is not the norm. Inter packages > >>> dependencies will not work in "modules". Is this a bug? > > >>> See:http://docs.python.org/tutorial/modules.html#packages > > >>> I suggest to add this message to the web2py book.
