Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #81853
| From | Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Style question: Importing modules from packages - 'from' vs 'as' |
| Date | 2014-12-03 12:27 +0100 |
| Organization | None |
| References | <CAPTjJmo1-QCgcbsjKNgH3oN-nm5qjB5GrvCiC6Qc9p+S8cNjpg@mail.gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.16528.1417606042.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
Chris Angelico wrote: > When importing a module from a subpackage, it's sometimes convenient > to refer to it throughout the code with a one-part name rather than > two. I'm going to use 'os.path' for the examples, but my actual > use-case is a custom package where the package name is, in the > application, quite superfluous. > > Throughout the code, I want to refer to "path.split()", > "path.isfile()", etc, without the "os." in front of them. I could do > either of these: > > import os.path as path > from os import path > > Which one would you recommend? Does it depend on context? Don't repeat yourself, so from os import path always. On the other hand I have never thought about actual renames, e. g. from os import path as stdpath versus import os.path as stdpath I think I'd use the latter as it looks simpler. > An "as" import works only if it's a module in a package, where the > "from" import can also import other objects (you can't go "import > pprint.pprint as pprint"). I'm fairly sure that's an argument... on > one side or another. :) In theory you could sometimes catch erroneous assumptions about pprint.pprint's type. But I don't care.
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Style question: Importing modules from packages - 'from' vs 'as' Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2014-12-03 12:27 +0100
csiph-web