[Python-Dev] Using and binding relative names (was Re: PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes) (original) (raw)
Georg Brandl g.brandl at gmx.net
Thu Feb 23 16:49:10 CET 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Using and binding relative names (was Re: PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
At 03:49 PM 2/23/2006 +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:
Steven Bethard wrote: > And, as you mention, it's consistent > with the relative import feature.
Only rather vaguely -- it's really somewhat different. With imports, .foo is an abbreviation for myself.foo, where myself is the absolute name for the current module, and you could replace all instances of .foo with that. Actually, "import .foo" is an abbreviation for "import myparent.foo", not "import myparent.myself.foo".
Actually, "import .foo" won't work anyway.
nitpicking-ly yours, Georg
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Using and binding relative names (was Re: PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]