4 ms·

The related thing that bothers me deeply is that import PIL does not make PIL.Image available. What the hell else do you expect me to do with PIL? Why isn

by dheera 2y ago

The related thing that bothers me deeply is that import PIL does not make PIL.Image available. What the hell else do you expect me to do with PIL? Why isn't PIL.Image included in importing PIL? You have to explicitly do either of these import PIL.Image from PIL import Image

woodruffw 2y ago
That’s because it’s a module within the PIL module, not an attribute of PIL. But that doesn’t really have anything to do with the original comment; that’s a different quirk of Python’s import machinery. (Understanding the difference between packages, module hierarchies, and module attributes is table stakes for architecting a large Python package correctly. PIL almost certainly does this to prevent hard-to-debug circular imports elsewhere in their codebase.)
- Jasper_ 2y ago
  It's a strange distinction, because the standard library sometimes eschews this. `os.path` is accessible through just `import os`, because they made os.py import it into the local namespace. I wish it was clearer sometimes what was a module, and what was an attribute in the core import syntax. `import foo; foo.bar` only breaks if it's a module, and `import foo.bar` only breaks if it's an attribute. If you do `from foo import bar`, the syntax works with both.
  - ciupicri 2y ago
    Just because `os.path` is accessible through just `import os`, doesn't mean that you shouldn't import it explicitly. As the Zen of Python says, explicit is better than implicit. After all it's documented separately at https://docs.python.org/3/library/os.path.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/os.path.html If you see `os.path.basename` what could `os.path` be? It would be a module most of the time because it's written with lowercase. `itertools.chain.from_iterable` [1] would be a notable exception. [1]: https://docs.python.org/3/library/itertools.html#itertools.chain.from_iterable https://docs.python.org/3/library/itertools.html#itertools.c...

by dheera 2y ago

woodruffw 2y ago

That’s because it’s a module within the PIL module, not an attribute of PIL. But that doesn’t really have anything to do with the original comment; that’s a different quirk of Python’s import machinery. (Understanding the difference between packages, module hierarchies, and module attributes is table stakes for architecting a large Python package correctly. PIL almost certainly does this to prevent hard-to-debug circular imports elsewhere in their codebase.)

Jasper_ 2y ago
It's a strange distinction, because the standard library sometimes eschews this. `os.path` is accessible through just `import os`, because they made os.py import it into the local namespace. I wish it was clearer sometimes what was a module, and what was an attribute in the core import syntax. `import foo; foo.bar` only breaks if it's a module, and `import foo.bar` only breaks if it's an attribute. If you do `from foo import bar`, the syntax works with both.
- ciupicri 2y ago
  Just because `os.path` is accessible through just `import os`, doesn't mean that you shouldn't import it explicitly. As the Zen of Python says, explicit is better than implicit. After all it's documented separately at https://docs.python.org/3/library/os.path.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/os.path.html If you see `os.path.basename` what could `os.path` be? It would be a module most of the time because it's written with lowercase. `itertools.chain.from_iterable` [1] would be a notable exception. [1]: https://docs.python.org/3/library/itertools.html#itertools.chain.from_iterable https://docs.python.org/3/library/itertools.html#itertools.c...