On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: > On Feb 18, 2011, at 12:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > >>It says they are "highly discouraged" because "absolute imports are >>more portable and usually more readable", but now that people have had >>a chance to use explicit relative imports, do people still believe >>this? I mean if we truly believed this then why did we add the syntax? >>I know I have used it and love it, let alone that I don't buy the >>portability argument. > > I agree with others that explicit relative imports should still be > discouraged. I've run into problems with them where imports break under some > situations. I don't remember the details, but I think it was when running > unittests or under -m or something. Yeah, I should file a bug next time I run > into it.
/me points to PEP 366 Relative imports and __main__ modules inside packages did *not* play nicely with each other at all for a while there.However, as far as I am aware, the only time you get in trouble now is when you run scripts inside packages directly (rather than via -m), but that causes trouble for multiple reasons, not just broken relative imports. If there are other cases that still have issues, I'd definitely like to hear about them. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
