> > Comment 2: I generally like this scheme, but think (for > > consistency and confusion-reduction) that it should go straight > > up the tree, instead of checking the root second. > > That would probably break code because the search could > find some other module having the same name as a top-level > one. OTOH, perhaps that situation is not all the common to > fear too much about it. > > Walking up all the way would certainly be easier to explain to > a 12-year old ;-) Yes, please. Do the long-term understandable thing here. I expect not too many packages have defined subpackages (or submodules) whose name conflicts with a standard library module, so you ought to be pretty safe here! --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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