Le 13/07/2011 06:40, Nick Coghlan a écrit :
> Now, the what's new for 2.7 doesn't actually *say* we made that change
> and I can't find any evidence for it in NEWS either, so I think the
> bug is actually in the __future__ module (and docs:
> http://docs.python.org/library/__future__).
I seemed to
On Jul 13, 2011, at 02:40 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>Now, the what's new for 2.7 doesn't actually *say* we made that change
>and I can't find any evidence for it in NEWS either, so I think the
>bug is actually in the __future__ module (and docs:
>http://docs.python.org/library/__future__).
I think
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> So are you claiming that the import of 'package' w/o the __future__
> statement actually succeeds even though there is no package.subpackage
> module? Obviously that would be a flat-out bug, but I just double-checked my
> sanity and that does
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 06:51, Sylvain Thénault
wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> the documentation state that absolute_import feature is the default
> behaviour with python 2.7, though it seems that it behave differently
> with the __future__ import :
>
> $ cat package/__init__.py
>
> import subpackage
>
> $
