On Jan 14, 6:01 pm, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > George Sakkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Unless I missed it, PEP 328 doesn't mention anything about this. > > What's the reason for not allowing "from .relative.module import *' > > ? > > It makes the code much harder to follow visually and inspect with > static analysis tools, since there's no way to see where names come > from in the code. It defeats the purpose of separate namespaces, > confusing the imported module's names with the current module's names > in a way that makes the indistinguishable. > > If you want to use all or most of the names in a module, keep them in > their own namespace: > > import spam > import eggs > > spam.do_stuff() > eggs.do_stuff() > > If you don't like the name of the module, then use whatever one suits > you: > > import your_mother_was_a_hamster as spam > import your_father_smelled_of_elderberries as eggs > > spam.do_stuff() > eggs.do_stuff() > > Both of these are superior to 'from spam import *' because it's clear > (to the reader and to static analysis tools) where every name comes > from: unqualified names must be defined in the current module, any > ones from the imported module are qualified with the module name. > > You also, in cases like the above example, avoid unknowingly > clobbering existing names by importing from another module into the > current namespace.
All the above are well-known and apply to both absolute and relative imports. I was asking why it's a syntax error specifically for relative imports. George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
