http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-March/117395.html Brett Cannon posted:
[in reply to Mark Shannon's suggestion of adding a builtins parameter to match locals and globals] > It's a mess right now to try to grab the __import__() > implementation and this would actually help clarify import semantics by > saying that __import__() for any chained imports comes from __import__()s > locals, globals, or builtins arguments (in that order) or from the builtins > module itself (i.e. tstate->builtins). How does that differ from today? If you're saying that the locals and (module-level) globals aren't always checked in order, then that is a semantic change. Probably a good change, but still a change -- and it can be made indepenently of Mark's suggestion. Also note that I would assume this was for sandboxing, and that missing names should *not* fall back to the "real" globals, although I would understand if bootstrapping required the import statement to get special treatment. (Note that I like Mark's proposed change; I just don't see how it cleans up import.) -jJ -- If there are still threading problems with my replies, please email me with details, so that I can try to resolve them. -jJ _______________________________________________ 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
