Hi Greg,
[me]
> > --> IMO 'from ... import ...' is EVIL and its use should be banned! <--
[Greg Stein]:
> You are being overly strict here. I use this all the time:
>
> from module import submodule
> ...
> submodule.Class()
>
> or even
>
> from module.submodule import subsub
> ...
> subsub.Blargle()
Okay. Later in my rant I wrote:
< Well: at least if people use 'from' to import arbitrary objects and
< classes. Using 'from package.subpackage import module' is an idiom,
< with which I can live with comfortably.
[Greg Stein]:
> In other words, "from package import module" is a Fine Thing. It can
> simplify your code without hiding where the symbols come from.
Yes, you are right.
But if you put the facade pattern[*] into use within such packages,
this will even simplify your live, if you later have to redesign
the internal substructure of your package.
[*] Design patterns and especially the "facade pattern" were AFAIK
introduced in the so called "Gang of four" book: "Design Patterns -
Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software", Addison Wesley, 1995.
The somewhat similar "whole part" design pattern is discussed
in the book "A System of Patterns" written by Buschmann, Meunier,
Rohnert, Sommerlad, Stal; published by John Wiley & Sons, New York; 1996;
ISBN 0 471 95869 7
> In general, I agree with you: importing symbols from a module into your
> namespace is a Bad Thing.
Fine. Consensus gives a warm and fuzzy feeling. ;-)
Regards, Peter
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