On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 03:25:50PM -0400, Cleber Rosa wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 01:12:09PM -0400, John Snow wrote: > > On 9/23/20 9:18 AM, Cleber Rosa wrote: > > > Relative imports are a source of heated debates, but when properly > > > used in a self contained module like here, they are very posititive > > > IMO. > > > > Still? I know they were loathed pre-3.5, but in my subjective experience > > they behave the nicest overall in the modern python dialect. > > > > What are the downsides? > > > > --js > > I'll just invite Beraldo to the discussion and let the fun begin :).
Nice try, Cleber! ;) Well, relative imports are supported by Guido, so I'm not here to say different. There are some use-cases. I'm not fully aware of the qapi context and big picture here, but I guess that depends on how you would like to use your package/scripts. Some may say that one "downside" is that relative imports are not as readable as absolute ones. But reading the 04/38 PATH description by jsnow, yes, looks like using relative imports is one valid option here. I prefer to use my scripts as packages inside venvs, and I use to have a setup.py, with absolute imports whenever possible, and when in development mode, make use of `python3 setup.py develop` which will create the "links" for me. -- Beraldo
