On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 04:23:29PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Martin
> Albrecht<m...@informatik.uni-bremen.de> wrote:
> >
> > Hi there,
> >
> > is there any compelling technical reason why we are using all.py for module
> > level initialisation instead of the Python standard __init__.py?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Martin
>
> No, there is no compelling technical reason. The actual reason is
> that I mistakenly thought that __init__.py should be empty long long
> ago.
> It's simply a historical mistake that we use all.py instead of
> __init__.py. I would welcome somebody fixing this, assuming I'm right
> that this is just a mistake on my part.
Ah. I always though that the purpose of all.py was to advertise the
public features that one was likely to want to import as:
from sage.bla.all import *
In particular this controlled what would be imported in the sage
interpreter. One particular aspect is that the current convention is
that
from sage.all import *
is recursive, importing everything from sage.***.all.
I surely would not mind getting rid of the all if at all possible, but
I am not sure I would want:
from sage import *
to be recursive.
Just my 2 cents.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
