Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > Note that I did not want to start a discussion about absolute vs. > > relative names (I believe everybody agrees that realtive file names > > are a Good Thing). The 'import __.module' thing is not new: ni.py > > had support for this and my patch simply adds it back to the > > implementation. > > It was left out of the 1.5 package implementation on purpose, and I > will fight proposals to get it back. It is an ugly hack that deserves > to die. So there! I agree that it's ugly to include the __ attribute in the module namespace due to the possible circular reference (parent->module, module->parent), but the patch I sent doesn't do this... or was "ugly" referring to the two underscores looking strange ? Could you elaborate a bit on the reasons for dropping __ support ? Not-really-looking-for-a-fight-here-<wink>-ly, -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Y2000: 109 days left Business: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
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