the demise of 'from foo import * and its implications?

[Robin Becker]

In article <mailman.983746566.27513.python-list at python.org>, Jeremy
Hylton <jeremy at alum.mit.edu> writes
>>>>>> "RB" == Robin Becker <robin at jessikat.fsnet.co.uk> writes:
>
>  RB> my preference would be that statements legal in one context
>  RB> should be legal in another where they make sense. I cannot see
>  RB> how using import * or eval etc in nested scopes is somehow
>  RB> obviously bad or different from the same usage in non-nested
>  RB> scopes. The fact that the prohibition comes from making things
>  RB> easier for the compiler adds to my confusion.
>
>Using import * in function's is asking for trouble, because it makes
>it impossible for someone reading the code to know what a variable
>refers to.  Consider this hypothetical bit of code:
>
>    from string import *
>
>    def f(x):
>        from amodule import *
>        return strip(x)
>
....

doesn't from foo import * make things hard to locate at the global level
as well? exec/eval/import can always do this surely.

This is not an argument against this particular usage alone.

>
>One other thing you're confused about is that the prohibition comes
>from making things easier for the compiler.  That's bunk.  The
>prohibition comes because there is no reasonable and intuitive
>semantics for these features in the presence of nested scopes.  When
>the issue first came up on python-dev, two seasoned Python programmers
>explained what the obvious semantics where.  They chose completely
>opposite semantics.  There's just no sensible meaning to assign to
>this kind of code in most cases.
>
>Jeremy
>

-- 
Robin Becker