> > Well, but since you want all imports to be global, it'd be insane to
> > introduce *new* syntax for global imports, wouldn't it?
>
> If we banned relative (a.k.a. local) imports, yes definitely.
>
> from __future__ global_imports
I think this ought to be a *global* flag rather than a per-module
flag. E.g. after setting
sys.allow_relative_import = False
all imports anywhere would be interpreted as absolute imports.
This would mean you couldn't have some code that still uses relative
imports, but the problem with the __future__ statement is that it
seems so pointless: packages that only use absolute imports don't need
it, and packages that use relative imports break if it is used.
About the only time where the __future__ statement would make a
difference is when a package defines a local module whose name is the
same as that of a global module, *and* the package also wants to
import the global module. I would personally solve that by renaming
the local module though...
--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