Peter Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ben Finney wrote:
> > Roy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>[current-directory module shadowing a system module]
> >
> > All hail the coming of PEP 328:
> > <URL:http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0328.html>
>
> Which, unless I misunderstand, would do nothing to change the
> behaviour of the OP's situation unless the mistakingly named
> "string.py" module was actually inside a package. If it was just in
> the current directory at the time, I don't think the PEP328 would
> have affected the situation.
Once PEP 328 is fully implemented, all bare 'import foo' statements
specify absolute imports (i.e. from sys.path only). To perform a
relative import (e.g. from current directory) will require different
syntax.
"[...] relative imports will use leading dots. A single leading
dot indicates a relative import, starting with the current
package. Two or more leading dots give a relative import to the
parent(s) of the current package [...]"
<URL:http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0328.html#guido-s-decision>
So, under PEP 328 rules, the original poster's current-directory
module could only be imported (a) if the current directory was in
sys.path, or (b) if the code specified a relative import. The
accidental shadowing of the stdlib module could not happen.
--
\ "You know what would make a good story? Something about a clown |
`\ who makes people happy, but inside he's real sad. Also, he has |
_o__) severe diarrhea." -- Jack Handey |
Ben Finney <http://www.benfinney.id.au/>
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
