On May 3, 10:08 am, "Alan Isaac" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Alex Martelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Very simply, PEP 328 explains: > > """ > > Relative Imports and __name__ > > > Relative imports use a module's __name__ attribute to determine that > > module's position in the package hierarchy. If the module's name does > > not contain any package information (e.g. it is set to '__main__') then > > relative imports are resolved as if the module were a top level module, > > regardless of where the module is actually located on the file system. > > """ > > To change my question somewhat, can you give me an example > where this behavior (when __name__ is '__main__') would > be useful for a script? (I.e., more useful than importing relative > to the directory holding the script, as indicated by __file__.)
Do you realize it's a different behaviour and it won't work for some packages? One possible alternative is to assume empty parent package and let from . import foo work but not from .. import bar or any other upper levels. The package author should also realize __init__.py will be ignored. -- Leo -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
