Michael Crute <mcr...@gmail.com> writes: > Is it bad form (i.e. non-pythonic) to have code in your __init__.py > files?
No, it's good form, but *only* for code that truly pertains to the entire package. Anything that can reasonably be in a module other than ‘__init__’, should be. That leaves the following things suitable for code in ‘__init__’, OTTOMH: * Metadata attributes for the package (e.g. version string). * Docstring for the package * ‘from foo import bar’ to present attributes of the package that are actually implemented in a module, which should be just about everything in the package. > If you object to code in __init__.py why I object only to code that isn't clearly “relates to the entire package and can't reasonably be implemented in a separate module”. If you're going to the effort of making a package (rather than just coding the namespace as a single module), then the implementation should be in modules other than ‘__init__’ to allow easier re-use, re-factoring, and testing. -- \ “When I wake up in the morning, I just can't get started until | `\ I've had that first, piping hot pot of coffee. Oh, I've tried | _o__) other enemas...” —Emo Philips | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
