On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote: > On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:03:29 -0500, Peng Yu wrote: > >>> If it should ever happen that two functions are too long to put in a >>> single file you should refactor your code. It is usually a good idea of >>> breaking problems down into single steps (ie functions) so you never >>> end up with a 5000 SLOC *function*. >> >> My definition of long is more than one screen. >> >>> How do functions of this length enhance the readability of your source >>> code? >> >> If the code is of one screen, you can easily see what it does without >> having to scroll back and forth. > > Far enough, but you exchange scrolling back and forth from function to > function with tabbing through editor tabs from file to file. I don't see > that this is an advantage. > > You also complicate calling functions. Instead of: > > > def parrot(): > spam() > ham() > cheeseshop() > > > you need: > > > from spam import spam > from ham import ham > from import cheeseshop > > def parrot(): > spam() > ham() > cheeseshop() > > > This is not an advantage!
I would say this is the disadvantage of python, if there is no walkaround to avoid using 'from spam import spam'. As this can be handled in C++ with walkaround. So far the best solution is: Inside test/__init__.py: from a import A # class A from file a.py from b import B # class B from file b.py However, this is not satisfactory enough because this artificially introduces the constraint that the file name can not be the same as the class/function name. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
