John Salerno wrote: > Robert Kern wrote: > >> What is ambiguous about A.B.D, A.E, and A.F.G? But if you like: > > I guess maybe I was looking at it backwards. From the way it was worded, > I thought the only information we had to use was the structure A.B.C, > and then given a statement like: > > from . import D > > we just had to figure out for ourselves that this results in A.B.D, > instead of, for example, A.C.D, or any other possibility. > > But I'm still a little confused about the use of the single or double > period. In this case: > > from . import D # Imports A.B.D > from .. import E # Imports A.E > > why do you need a single period in the first example, and a double in > the second, if they both are importing from A? If E is directly under A, > couldn't you just use a single period? And since D is nested twice > beneath A (i.e., in A, then in B), wouldn't you need two periods there > instead?
Remember that this is code in the A.B.C module. The first form looks for modules in the A.B package, that is, next to A.B.C . The second looks for modules in the A package, next to A.B . -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
