On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 19:38, Pierre GM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thursday 19 June 2008 20:28:46 Robert Kern wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 19:15, Pierre GM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Your question raises a good point: is there any consensus on using >> > __all__ instead of the module namespace ? >> >> I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify? > > __all__ is used on a regular basis in numpy instead of using modules > namespace: why ?
The contents of numpy.core.foo, etc., are typically exposed at a higher level, like in numpy.core.__init__ and numpy.__init__. Defining numpy.core.foo.__all__ lets the __init__.py files just "from numpy.core.foo import *" and have a nearly-sensible namespace. Even if you aren't catering to the "from ... import *" use case, including a name in __all__ is a strong and useful signal about what is part of the public API for your module. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
