joperez＠hotmail.fr wrote: > There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it. (from > The Zen of > Python https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0020/) > However, in something as basic as import syntax, that's not the case. This > example comes > from PEP 221 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0221/) > : > A slightly special case exists for importing sub-modules. The statement > import os.path > stores the module os locally as os, so that the imported submodule path is > accessible as > os.path. As a result, > import os.path as p > stores os.path, not os, in p. This makes it effectively the same as > from os import path as p > Not only it doesn't respect the Zen of Python, but it's also quite > counterintuitive > because as explained in the PEP, the behavior of import os.path as p is not > the same than import os.path, while from os import path as p is > quite consistent with or without as. > There is one case where import ... as ... is consistent (and justified IMHO), > that's for statements like import _thread as thread, only the imported object > is aliased (as from ... import ... as ... do). > Looking at the standard library, only few dozens of lines match the regex > ^import > \w+\.(\w|\.)+ as, while the other (equivalent) form has hundreds of matches. > That's why I propose to restrict the aliased import statement (import ... as > ...) to not be able to alias imported submodule, letting from ... import ... > as ... statement be the only to do it. > The roadmap could be to depreciate the statement with a warning in a few next > releases, to > remove finally remove the syntax. > (hoping my English is okay)
`import ...` and `from ... import ...` does not behave in the same manner as it is explained in docs: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html#import. So they are not equivalent statements. `import os.path as p` and `from os import path as p` bind the same local name to the same object, that is true. However, they do in a quite different manner. And this difference can be relevant, for instance, when are dealing with circular imports (ok, I cannot remember any example of this right now). So I do not see how they are violating any principle in PEP 20 "The Zen of Python". Anyway, The Zen of Python is an inspirational document, not a law. Even it it was the law, any law has its exceptions and PEP 221 "Import As" presents and explains one useful exception. In my opinion... Thank you. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/MGLG5YJMDLDU3LHCJP2POCVFW33342LB/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
