Ethan Furman wrote:
> The strongest reason for not doing this is that it pollutes the current
> namespace, not that it obliterates the 'pkg' namespace.
Sorry, I phrased that badly. When I said "obliterates the 'pkg' namespace" I
was referring to dumping the 'pkg' namespace into the current namespace
(polluting it, as you would say).
> How would that be different from
> --> import pkg
Because that does not import all of the (public) modules and packages under
'pkg'. For example scipy has has a subpackage 'linalg'. If I just do 'import
scipy' then I can not refer to 'scipy.linalg' until I do 'import scipy.linalg'.
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> By the way, this sort of question should probably go to the python-ideas
> mailing list for any extended discussion.
Sorry, didn't realize that would be the more appropriate list.
Thanks,
Brendan
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com