Greg Ewing wrote:
So I think we really want *three* kinds of module reference:
A: Explicitly absolute B: Explicitly relative to the current module C: Searched for upwards in the package hierarchy from the current module
(Note that C is a generalisation of the current "ambiguous" references which only look in two places.)
Alternate spellings (plus category D, which is "Python 2.3 semantics"): A: from __absolute__.dotted.name import foo B: from __relative__.dotted.name import bar C: from __heirarchy__.dotted.name import foobar D: from dotted.name import barfoo I believe this spelling would only require import to handle the special cases as the first 'package' name (although having the compiler recognise them may be a later optimisation), and should also work with straight "import __absolute__.dotted.name.foo" statements. Then Guido's migration plan would apply to the progression of the D semantics from the Python 2.3 model to being a shorthand for the absolute semantics. And once _that_ has happened, then we could get rid of the '__absolute__' version in the name of TOOWTDI. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | Brisbane, Australia Email: ncoghlan@email.com | Mobile: +61 409 573 268