On 6 August 2015 at 09:47, Ben Finney email@example.com wrote:
Paul Sokolovsky firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
I find it quite a sign of problem, because if one accepts that one can't just run a script right away, but needs to do extra steps, then well, that enterprisey niche is pretty crowded and there're more choices how to make it more complicated.
Python's BDFL has spoken of running modules with relative import as top-level scripts:
I'm -1 on this and on any other proposed twiddlings of the __main__ machinery. The only use case seems to be running scripts that happen to be living inside a module's directory, which I've always seen as an antipattern. To make me change my mind you'd have to convince me that it isn't. <URL:https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-April/006793.html>
He doesn't describe (that I can find) what makes him think it's an antipattern, so I'm not clear on how he expects to be convinced it's a valid pattern.
It's an anti-pattern because doing it fundamentally confuses the import system's internal state: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0395/#why-are-my-imports-broken
Relative imports from the main module just happen to be a situation where the failure is an obvious one rather than subtle state corruption.
Nonetheless, that appears to be the hurdle you'd need to confront.
This came up more recently during the PEP 420 discussions, when the requirement to include __init__.py to explicitly mark package directories was eliminated. This means there's no longer any way for the interpreter to reliably infer from the filesystem layout precisely where in the module hierarchy you intended a module to live. See https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0420/#discussion for references.
However, one of the subproposals from PEP 395 still offers a potential fix: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0395/#id24
That proposes to allow explicit relative imports at the command line, such that Paul's example could be correctly invoked as:
python3 -m ..pkg.foo
It would also be possible to provide a syntactic shorthand for submodules of top level packages:
python3 -m .foo
The key here is that the interpreter is being explicitly told that the current directory is inside a package, as well as how far down in the package hierarchy it lives, and can adjust the way it sets sys.path accordingly before proceeding on to import "pkg.foo" as __main__.
That should be a relatively uncomplicated addition to runpy._run_module_as_main that could be rolled into Cameron's PEP plans. Steps required:
* count leading dots in the supplied mod_name * remove "leading_dots-1" trailing directory names from sys.path * strip the leading dots from mod_name before continuing with the rest of the function * in the special case of only 1 leading dot, remove the final directory segment from sys.path and prepend it to mod_name with a dot separator