Is this a good way to work with init and exception

Cecil Westerhof Cecil at
Mon Jul 20 00:19:49 CEST 2015

On Sunday 19 Jul 2015 23:08 CEST, Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Cecil Westerhof <Cecil at> wrote:
>>> I think it's fine, then. As long as it makes absolutely no sense
>>> to have two separately-initialized twitter connections, and as
>>> long as it's okay for two separate modules to both import this and
>>> to then share state, then what you have is fine.
>> I do not see myself doing this, but I like to know ‘everything’.
>> When I have a program with two different modules that both import
>> this, they would get in each-others way? How?
> If two modules import the same module, they get two references to
> that same module, not two separate module instances. Since your
> parameters appear only to affect the initialization itself, this is
> not likely to be a problem (it's not like you'll need to
> authenticate with two different sets of credentials, for instance),
> but it will mean that the second one will import an
> already-initialized module. That's why I suggested the try_init
> function which would quietly return an immediate success if the
> module had already been initialized. But if this isn't going to be
> an issue, then your code's fine.

Good to know. I would expect two different instances.

I agree that in my case it would not be a problem, but I put the code
on GitHub:
I should do my best to circumvent nasty surprises for users of the
code. Someone else could use several Twitter accounts at the same
time. Is there a way to do this?

Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer

More information about the Python-list mailing list