I'm working on a python project that has some of duplicated code.
I'm trying to remove the duplicated files, and keep only one file, however, my problem is that others projects already use the removes files, and I don't want to have to change their imports.
Example:
src/
-----a.py
-----b.py
Lets assume both a and b implement the same function f, and there are pieces of code in the other project who uses from src.a import f and others use from src.b import f
Right now my solution is to keep the implementation in a and have b only contain from src.a import f.
Is there a different way where I could completely remove b but still have the ability to use from src.b import f ?
Without a horrible import hook hack that emulates a virtual b.py, no.
However, you can just make b.py a "re-export" module like
from a import foo, baz, quux
assuming those are the duplicate names.
We recently had a talk about removing any circular imports we might have and refactoring our code to not use imports inside functions anymore.
One of the ways that is recommended for this in many places (including PEP-8 style guide here - under imports) is to use:
import a
a.foo()
instead of:
from a import foo
foo()
I saw some examples and got convinced that this is probably a better way to do the imports (even though im used to the from way of importing).
But I dont understand is how come 99% of python examples dont use this way of importing. And why my pycharm is not allowing auto-import in this manner (or is it?) if this is the right way to import.
Looking into pycharm configurations, I didnt find a way to auto-complete with import y.x instead of from y import x
You can't use import x instead of from y import x. You must use import x.y if y is a submodule, or import x; a = x.y if y is a variable (class, function, constant ...)
To make Pycharm auto complete with the root module name, you have to start typing the root module name instead of the sub-element you want to use.
By exemple, if you want to use the split function of os.path, if you start typing split and then hit double CTRL-SPACE, Pycharm will auto-import with from os.path import split. But if you start typing os, Pycharm will auto-complete with import os and the you can end your statement with .path.split
I'm building a dependency graph in python3 using the ast module. How do I know what file(s) will be imported if that import statement were to be executed?
Not a complete answer, but here are some bits you should be aware of:
Imports might happen in conditional or try-catch blocks. So depending on a setting of an environment variable, module A might or might not import module B.
There's a wide variety of import syntax: import A, from A import B, from A import *, from . import A, from .. import A, from ..A import B as well as their versions with A replaced with sub-modules.
Imports can happen in any executable context - the top-level of the file, in a function, in a class definition etc.
eval can evaluate code with imports. Up to you if you consider such code to be a dependency.
The standard library modulefinder module might help.
As suggested in a comment: the other answers are valid, but one of the fundamental problems is that your examples only work for 'simple' scripts or files: A lot of more complex code will use things like dynamic imports: consider the following:
path, task_name = "module.function".rsplit(".", 1);
module = importlib.import_module(path);
real_func = getattr(module, task_name);
real_func();
The actual original string could be obfuscated, or pulled from a DB, or a file or...
There are alternatives to importlib, but this is on top of the exec type stuff you might see in #horia's good answer.
I am interacting with a python 2.x API written in a non-OO way, it uses module-global scope for some internal state driven stuff. It's needed in a context where it's no longer singleton, and modifying the original code (not ours) is not an option.
Short of using subprocess runs of separate interpreters, is there any way I could box off the modules and interact with multiple instances of the module (thus treating it as an object)?
I need to use the module to drive 2 different setups - which it doesn't internally seem to work with.
Disclaimer: Please don't do this. Please do this only if in a very odd situation - and try to alter the situation in other ways before doing this. I did this to cope with odd code that could not be changed at the time of asking - not to provide a way to proliferate more odd code.
Just remove the module from sys.modules:
>>> import sys
>>> import mod as m1
>>> m1.x = 1
>>> del sys.modules['mod']
>>> import mod as m2
>>> m2.x = 2
>>> m1.x
1
You can try by fooling sys.modules
import badmodule as badmod1
import sys
del sys.modules['badmodule']
import badmodule as badmod2
If this works or not of course depends on what the bad module is doing...
I haven't used it personally but it seems that Exocet library may help.
Easiest way is to make two copies of the module and import them separately. For example, take your module thingabobber and make two copies named thingabobber1 and thingabobber2. Then just:
import thingabobber1, thingabobber2
If this isn't feasible, delete the module from sys.modules after initially importing it so you get a second copy on the second import.
import sys
import thingabobber as thingabobber1
del sys.modules["thingabobber"]
import thingabobber as thingabobber2
This can be achieved by importing the module via different paths.
That is - if in your sys.path you have two different dotted routes to the module, the module cache will create two different instances of the module with different symbol trees, globals and so on.
This can be used to have multiple versions of a library also.
Beware that it will lead to exceptions not being caught (as you are trying to catch the wrong symbol).
I was trying this with binary (so) submodules, but that procedure failed.
I am a little confused by the multitude of ways in which you can import modules in Python.
import X
import X as Y
from A import B
I have been reading up about scoping and namespaces, but I would like some practical advice on what is the best strategy, under which circumstances and why. Should imports happen at a module level or a method/function level? In the __init__.py or in the module code itself?
My question is not really answered by "Python packages - import by class, not file" although it is obviously related.
In production code in our company, we try to follow the following rules.
We place imports at the beginning of the file, right after the main file's docstring, e.g.:
"""
Registry related functionality.
"""
import wx
# ...
Now, if we import a class that is one of few in the imported module, we import the name directly, so that in the code we only have to use the last part, e.g.:
from RegistryController import RegistryController
from ui.windows.lists import ListCtrl, DynamicListCtrl
There are modules, however, that contain dozens of classes, e.g. list of all possible exceptions. Then we import the module itself and reference to it in the code:
from main.core import Exceptions
# ...
raise Exceptions.FileNotFound()
We use the import X as Y as rarely as possible, because it makes searching for usage of a particular module or class difficult. Sometimes, however, you have to use it if you wish to import two classes that have the same name, but exist in different modules, e.g.:
from Queue import Queue
from main.core.MessageQueue import Queue as MessageQueue
As a general rule, we don't do imports inside methods -- they simply make code slower and less readable. Some may find this a good way to easily resolve cyclic imports problem, but a better solution is code reorganization.
Let me just paste a part of conversation on django-dev mailing list started by Guido van Rossum:
[...]
For example, it's part of the Google Python style guides[1] that all
imports must import a module, not a class or function from that
module. There are way more classes and functions than there are
modules, so recalling where a particular thing comes from is much
easier if it is prefixed with a module name. Often multiple modules
happen to define things with the same name -- so a reader of the code
doesn't have to go back to the top of the file to see from which
module a given name is imported.
Source: http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/78975372cdfb7d1a
1: http://code.google.com/p/soc/wiki/PythonStyleGuide#Module_and_package_imports
I would normally use import X on module level. If you only need a single object from a module, use from X import Y.
Only use import X as Y in case you're otherwise confronted with a name clash.
I only use imports on function level to import stuff I need when the module is used as the main module, like:
def main():
import sys
if len(sys.argv) > 1:
pass
HTH
Someone above said that
from X import A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O,P
is equivalent to
import X
import X allows direct modifications to A-P, while from X import ... creates copies of A-P. For from X import A..P you do not get updates to variables if they are modified. If you modify them, you only modify your copy, but X does know about your modifications.
If A-P are functions, you won't know the difference.
Others have covered most of the ground here but I just wanted to add one case where I will use import X as Y (temporarily), when I'm trying out a new version of a class or module.
So if we were migrating to a new implementation of a module, but didn't want to cut the code base over all at one time, we might write a xyz_new module and do this in the source files that we had migrated:
import xyz_new as xyz
Then, once we cut over the entire code base, we'd just replace the xyz module with xyz_new and change all of the imports back to
import xyz
DON'T do this:
from X import *
unless you are absolutely sure that you will use each and every thing in that module. And even then, you should probably reconsider using a different approach.
Other than that, it's just a matter of style.
from X import Y
is good and saves you lots of typing. I tend to use that when I'm using something in it fairly frequently But if you're importing a lot from that module, you could end up with an import statement that looks like this:
from X import A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O,P
You get the idea. That's when imports like
import X
become useful. Either that or if I'm not really using anything in X very frequently.
I generally try to use the regular import modulename, unless the module name is long, or used often..
For example, I would do..
from BeautifulSoup import BeautifulStoneSoup as BSS
..so I can do soup = BSS(html) instead of BeautifulSoup.BeautifulStoneSoup(html)
Or..
from xmpp import XmppClientBase
..instead of importing the entire of xmpp when I only use the XmppClientBase
Using import x as y is handy if you want to import either very long method names , or to prevent clobbering an existing import/variable/class/method (something you should try to avoid completely, but it's not always possible)
Say I want to run a main() function from another script, but I already have a main() function..
from my_other_module import main as other_module_main
..wouldn't replace my main function with my_other_module's main
Oh, one thing - don't do from x import * - it makes your code very hard to understand, as you cannot easily see where a method came from (from x import *; from y import *; my_func() - where is my_func defined?)
In all cases, you could just do import modulename and then do modulename.subthing1.subthing2.method("test")...
The from x import y as z stuff is purely for convenience - use it whenever it'll make your code easier to read or write!
When you have a well-written library, which is sometimes case in python, you ought just import it and use it as it. Well-written library tends to take life and language of its own, resulting in pleasant-to-read -code, where you rarely reference the library. When a library is well-written, you ought not need renaming or anything else too often.
import gat
node = gat.Node()
child = node.children()
Sometimes it's not possible to write it this way, or then you want to lift down things from library you imported.
from gat import Node, SubNode
node = Node()
child = SubNode(node)
Sometimes you do this for lot of things, if your import string overflows 80 columns, It's good idea to do this:
from gat import (
Node, SubNode, TopNode, SuperNode, CoolNode,
PowerNode, UpNode
)
The best strategy is to keep all of these imports on the top of the file. Preferrably ordered alphabetically, import -statements first, then from import -statements.
Now I tell you why this is the best convention.
Python could perfectly have had an automatic import, which'd look from the main imports for the value when it can't be found from global namespace. But this is not a good idea. I explain shortly why. Aside it being more complicated to implement than simple import, programmers wouldn't be so much thinking about the depedencies and finding out from where you imported things ought be done some other way than just looking into imports.
Need to find out depedencies is one reason why people hate "from ... import *". Some bad examples where you need to do this exist though, for example opengl -wrappings.
So the import definitions are actually valuable as defining the depedencies of the program. It is the way how you should exploit them. From them you can quickly just check where some weird function is imported from.
The import X as Y is useful if you have different implementations of the same module/class.
With some nested try..import..except ImportError..imports you can hide the implementation from your code. See lxml etree import example:
try:
from lxml import etree
print("running with lxml.etree")
except ImportError:
try:
# Python 2.5
import xml.etree.cElementTree as etree
print("running with cElementTree on Python 2.5+")
except ImportError:
try:
# Python 2.5
import xml.etree.ElementTree as etree
print("running with ElementTree on Python 2.5+")
except ImportError:
try:
# normal cElementTree install
import cElementTree as etree
print("running with cElementTree")
except ImportError:
try:
# normal ElementTree install
import elementtree.ElementTree as etree
print("running with ElementTree")
except ImportError:
print("Failed to import ElementTree from any known place")
I'm with Jason in the fact of not using
from X import *
But in my case (i'm not an expert programmer, so my code does not meet the coding style too well) I usually do in my programs a file with all the constants like program version, authors, error messages and all that stuff, so the file are just definitions, then I make the import
from const import *
That saves me a lot of time. But it's the only file that has that import, and it's because all inside that file are just variable declarations.
Doing that kind of import in a file with classes and definitions might be useful, but when you have to read that code you spend lots of time locating functions and classes.