"spike grobstein" write:
> I understand why it wasn't working and it makes sense based on the
> structure of namespaces that python defines, however, I'm just
> surprised that there isn't some kind of built-in facility for dealing
> with these types of things.
>
> Module packages are a spectacular
I understand why it wasn't working and it makes sense based on the
structure of namespaces that python defines, however, I'm just
surprised that there isn't some kind of built-in facility for dealing
with these types of things.
Module packages are a spectacular idea, it is just kinda easy to get
c
spike grobstein wrote:
> so, since python supports module packages like it does, you'd think
> that it would have ways of making add-on or extension modules to be
> more self contained.
Errm... You're not quite understanding what the problem is about. A class is
just an object. A class object may
oh, wow. that works!!!
thanks for the help!
so, since python supports module packages like it does, you'd think
that it would have ways of making add-on or extension modules to be
more self contained.
Thanks, again!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
spike grobstein wrote:
> I'd like the packages to define a file path for supporting files
> (graphics, etc) that are stored inside the package. The problem is that
> the superclass's definition (stored elsewhere) has all of the code for
> actually opening the files, so when I use the
> os.path.dirn
