On 14/04/2018 06:27, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 14 April 2018 at 13:28, Ken Hilton
wrote: Hi all,
First of all, please excuse me if I'm presenting this idea in the wrong way or at the wrong time - I'm new to this mailing list and haven't seen anyone propose a new idea on it yet, so I don't know the customs.
I have an idea for importing files with arbitrary names. Currently, the "official" way to import arbitrary files is to use the "imp" module, as shown by this answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/3137914/6605349 However, this method takes two function calls and is not as (aesthetically pleasing? is that the word?) as a simple "import" statement.
Modules aren't required to be stored on the filesystem, so we have no plans to offer this.
`runpy.run_path()` exists to let folks run arbitrary Python files and collect the resulting namespace, while if folks really want to implement pseudo-imports based on filenames we expose the necessary building blocks in importlib (https://docs.python.org/3/library/importlib.html#importing-a-source-file-dir...)
The fact that run_path() has a nice straightforward invocation model, and the import emulation recipe doesn't is intended as a hint :)
Cheers, Nick.
I generally love the current import system for "just working" regardless of platform, installation details, etc., but what I would like to see is a clear import local, (as opposed to import from wherever you can find something to satisfy mechanism). This is the one thing that I miss from C/C++ where #include <x> is system includes and #include "x" search differing include paths, (if used well). -- Steve (Gadget) Barnes Any opinions in this message are my personal opinions and do not reflect those of my employer. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com