On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 06:01:26 -0700, Tim wrote: > I saw a thread on reddit/python where just about everyone said they > never put code in their __init__ files.
Pfft. Reddit users. They're just as bad as Stackoverflow users. *wink* > Here's a stackoverflow thread saying the same thing. > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1944569/how-do-i-write-good-correct- package-init-py-files > > That's new to me. I like to put functions in there that other modules > within the module need. Thought that was good practice DRY and so forth. Its fine to put code in __init__.py files. If the expected interface is for the user to say: result = package.spam() then in the absence of some specific reason why spam needs to be in a submodule, why shouldn't it go into package/__init__.py ? Of course it's okay for the definition of spam to be in a submodule, if necessary. But it shouldn't be mandatory. > And I never do 'from whatever import *' Ever. > > The reddit people said they put all their stuff into different modules > and leave init empty. Did any one of them state *why* they do this? What benefit is there to make this a hard rule? Did anyone mention what the standard library does? Check out the dbm, logging, html, http, collections, importlib, and curses packages (and probably others): https://github.com/python/cpython/tree/3.7/Lib -- Steven D'Aprano "Ever since I learned about confirmation bias, I've been seeing it everywhere." -- Jon Ronson -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
