>>>>> "PR" == Prabhu Ramachandran <prabhu@aero.iitm.ernet.in> writes: PR> Ummm doing an 'import os' will import the package1/os.py and PR> *not* the standard one. This will happen even though os.py was PR> imported earlier by site.py. This is what Gordon was objecting PR> to in the first place and why he proposes using rimport, PR> rrimport etc. to make things more explicit. Of course, you can use the existing mechanism to do this: 'from package1 import os'. The use of an explicit name seems like the clearest route when you have a package-local module that shadows a top-level module -- no need to understand details of relative imports, no question about what is intended by the code. I haven't followed this thread closely. Is there some reason that explicit names in imports is not sufficient? Jeremy
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4