I think the bottom line on this is using your own sense of risk/reward with each given module imported. Some modules (Tkinter comes to mind) it makes sense to pollute while others it doesn't.
Harlin "Peter Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Peter Mayne wrote: > > Peter Hansen wrote: > >> and it's still a bad idea in almost all cases anyway > > > > Since I've been playing with PyQt lately... > > > > Is qt not one of the "almost all" cases? From the limited number of > > examples I've seen, it seems to be common to do > > > > from qt import * > > This sort of thing seems common amongst large frameworks such > as PyQt or wxPython. This is unfortunate, IMHO, though it isn't > really a serious concern for most users. > > I'm grateful that the most recent versions of wxPython have > abandoned that approach in favour of a nice clean "import wx", > and as far as I can tell the code does not suffer as a result, > and gains substantially in clarity. Maybe the "qt" module > defines far fewer names than the "wx" module does, but I for > one am glad not to have to worry that I won't accidentally > conflict with the hundreds that are there (in wx), nor to > worry that my code lacks in readability. > > > Since most of the imported names start with "Q", are called QLabel, > > QSlider, etc, and are generally recognisable in context, this would seem > > to be a reasonable case of namespace pollution. > > > > I'm certainly not arguing with the general premise, just wondering if qt > > is one of the sensible exceptions. > > If not sensible, at least fairly widely accepted, not a serious > impediment to effective use, and definitely not without precedent. > > -Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list