On 9/10/2011 4:11 AM, Nobody wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 11:37:44 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
The Java compiler also acts as a "make" program. If it doesn't find
a .class file for a needed class, it will search for the corresponding
.java file and compile that. So to compile a complex program,
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Nobody wrote:
> I suspect that the one-to-one correspondence between classes and .class
> files is mostly technical (e.g. Java's security model). The one-to-one
> correspondence between class files and source files could probably be
> relaxed, but at the expense of
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 11:37:44 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> The Java compiler also acts as a "make" program. If it doesn't find
>> a .class file for a needed class, it will search for the corresponding
>> .java file and compile that. So to compile a complex program, you only
>> need to compile th
Kayode: Are the number of pages in that tutorial planned?
:P
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Kayode Odeyemi wrote:
>> You might want to have a look at this:
>> http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/htdc.html
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 9, 20
You might want to have a look at this:
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/htdc.html
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Nobody wrote:
> > The Java compiler also acts as a "make" program. If it doesn't find
> > a .class file for a needed cla
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Nobody wrote:
> The Java compiler also acts as a "make" program. If it doesn't find
> a .class file for a needed class, it will search for the corresponding
> .java file and compile that. So to compile a complex program, you only
> need to compile the top-level fil
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:29:26 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I suppose "one class per file" might be useful for those using an editor
> with no search functionality. Other than that, is there any justification
> for this rule? Any Java fans want to defend this?
Not a Java fan, but:
The Java comp
On Thursday, September 8, 2011 1:29:26 AM UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> Other than that, is there any justification
> for this rule? Any Java fans want to defend this?
>
> If "one class per file", why not "one method per class" too? Why is the
> second rule any more si
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:29:26 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I suppose "one class per file" might be useful for those using an editor
> with no search functionality. Other than that, is there any
> justification for this rule? Any Java fans want to defend this?
Back in the dark ages known as the
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> Peter Otten wrote:
>
>> Classes and functions are grouped into
>> submodules by their functionality rather than employing Java's mechanical
>> one-class-per-file pattern.
>
> Surely it's an anti-pattern?
I don't think that's true; Java mer
Peter Otten wrote:
> Classes and functions are grouped into
> submodules by their functionality rather than employing Java's mechanical
> one-class-per-file pattern.
Surely it's an anti-pattern?
I suppose "one class per file" might be useful for those using an editor
with no search functionality
First of all MyClass.py should be renamed to myclass.py. Module names
should be lowercase. Secondly, put this in __init__.py:
from .myclass import MyClass
and there you go.
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 08:56:32AM -0700, bclark76 wrote:
> I'm learning python, and was playing with structuring pac
On 9/7/2011 9:56 AM, bclark76 wrote:
I'm learning python, and was playing with structuring packages.
Basically I want to have a package called mypackage that defines a
number of classes and functions.
so I create:
mypackage
__init__.py
myfunc.py
MyClass.py
my __init__.py is b
On Sep 7, 10:56 am, bclark76 wrote:
> I'm learning python, and was playing with structuring packages.
>
> Basically I want to have a package called mypackage that defines a
> number of classes and functions.
>
> so I create:
>
> mypackage
> __init__.py
> myfunc.py
> MyClass.py
Don't t
bclark76 wrote:
> I'm learning python, and was playing with structuring packages.
If you are coming from Jave you have to unlearn a thing or two.
> Basically I want to have a package called mypackage that defines a
> number of classes and functions.
> I'm trying to follow the rule that every f
Check python pep8: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/
And you will see than you shouldn't named modules as you did, so you
should do something like:
mypackage
__init__.py
mymodule
...
mypackage.mymodule.MyClass
On 07/09/11 18:11, John Gordon wrote:
In<2a4f542c-a8c1-46c7-98
In <2a4f542c-a8c1-46c7-9899-a3fad0940...@x11g2000yqc.googlegroups.com> bclark76
writes:
> mypackage
> __init__.py
> myfunc.py
> MyClass.py
> from mypackage import MyClass
Try this instead:
from mypackage.MyClass import MyClass
--
John Gordon A is for Amy, who
I'm learning python, and was playing with structuring packages.
Basically I want to have a package called mypackage that defines a
number of classes and functions.
so I create:
mypackage
__init__.py
myfunc.py
MyClass.py
my __init__.py is blank.
my MyClass.py looks like:
import b
18 matches
Mail list logo
