On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Erik Max Francis <m...@alcyone.com> wrote: >> This would, if I understand imports correctly, have ham() operate in >> one namespace and spam() in another. Depending on what's being done, >> that could be quite harmless, or it could be annoying (no sharing >> module-level constants, etc). > > No, he's using `from ... import *`. It dumps it all in the same namespace > (which is usually why it's frowned upon, but in his example it's kind of the > point).
The functions are defined in two separate global namespaces, though. That means that the actual bindings visible to ham() are different from the globals visible to spam(). Constants should be fine, but if ham() modifies a global, then spam() won't see the change, and vice-versa. > Neither makes sense. `break` exits out of looping structures, which the > top-level code of a module most certainly is not. Why does that matter? It seems a bit like arguing that the `in` keyword can't be used for membership testing, because it's already in use in the for-loop syntax. It wouldn't be the first time Python has reused a keyword. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
