Simple question regarding module initialization

Troy Melhase troy.melhase at gmail.com
Wed Jun 21 03:53:34 CEST 2006


$ ipython

in [1]: __import__?
Type:           builtin_function_or_method
Base Class:     <type 'builtin_function_or_method'>
String Form:    <built-in function __import__>
Namespace:      Python builtin
Docstring:
    __import__(name, globals, locals, fromlist) -> module

    Import a module.  The globals are only used to determine the context;
    they are not modified.  The locals are currently unused.  The fromlist
    should be a list of names to emulate ``from name import ...'', or an
    empty list to emulate ``import name''.
    When importing a module from a package, note that __import__('A.B', ...)
    returns package A when fromlist is empty, but its submodule B when
    fromlist is not empty.



On 6/20/06, Patrick M. Nielsen <thirsteh at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys.
>
> Yes, this is very much a neophyte question, but I was pondering;
>
> modules = ['stackless',
>            'sys',
>            'slsocket as socket',
>            'random, time',
>            'traceback',
>            'string',
>            'util']
>
> for module in modules:
>     print "Loading %s..." % module
>     exec 'import %s' % module
>
>
> Although I like the outcome of writing it like this, I don't feel good about
> it. Is this against standard Python conventions or morals? Loading modules
> this way, that is (instead of just importing it all "the right way" and
> making a print statement for each one).
>
>



More information about the Python-list mailing list