[Python-ideas] PEP for executing a module in a package containing relative imports (original) (raw)
Steven Bethard steven.bethard at gmail.com
Mon Apr 23 03🔞51 CEST 2007
- Previous message: [Python-ideas] PEP for executing a module in a package containing relative imports
- Next message: [Python-ideas] PEP for executing a module in a package containing relative imports
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 4/22/07, Aahz <aahz at pythoncraft.com> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007, Steven Bethard wrote: > On 4/22/07, Christian Heimes <lists at cheimes.de> wrote: >> >> I'm proposing the following changes: >> >> * sys.main is added which contains the dotted name of the main script. >> This allows code like: >> >> if name == sys.main: >> ... > > Note that this really requires the code:: > > import sys > if name == sys.main: > > The import statement matters to me because 77% of my modules that use > the main idiom don't import sys. Hence, for those modules, this > new idiom introduces more boilerplate.
Does this follow the axiom that 83% of all statistics are made up on the spot? ;-) Seriously, if I'm writing a script that requires main, chances are excellent that it already includes sys (because it's probably a command-line script that's graduating to module status).
No, I actually went and counted in my local repository. There are two main reasons why that's true: (1) Most unittest modules just run unittest.main(), so no import of sys. (2) Most other modules use optparse or argparse, so no import of sys.
Steve
I'm not in-sane. Indeed, I am so far out of sane that you appear a tiny blip on the distant coast of sanity. --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
- Previous message: [Python-ideas] PEP for executing a module in a package containing relative imports
- Next message: [Python-ideas] PEP for executing a module in a package containing relative imports
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]