[Python-Dev] Re: Christmas Wishlist
barry at python.org
Wed Dec 17 21:59:47 EST 2003
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 05:32, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> If absolute imports were to be the only type allowed, then it would seem
> that the only possible location for naming conflicts is in the _first_
> So if I wanted to use two different third party modules, both of which
> have unfortunately chosen the same name for the top-level package, the
> only way to let them co-exist is to redo _all_ of the imports in one or
> the other of them.
> Whereas, if relative pathing is possible, I believe that all I have to
> do is push them one level down in the package heirarchy (using distinct
> names that I invent), and neither of them ever even knows about the
> other's existence. I can get at both of them unambiguously, by using my
> new top=level names, and neither package even knows that it is no longer
> starting at the top of the import heirarchy.
> Or is there some other solution being proposed to this problem, and I
> just haven't understood it?
Has this ever happened to you in practice?
It seems like the way out would be to start adopting a Java-like
convention for package names. The problem with that in current Python
is that you can't (easily) weave a package's contents from different
locations in the file system.
More information about the Python-Dev