Relative Package Import

[Robert Hancock]

mypackage/
__init__.py
push/
__init__.py
dest.py
feed/
__init__py
subject.py

In subject.py I have
from ..push import dest

But i receive the error:
Caught exception importing module subject:
File "/usr/local/python/lib/python2.5/site-packages/pychecker/
checker.py", line 621, in setupMainCode()
module = imp.load_module(self.moduleName, file, filename, smt)
File "subject.py", line 1, in <module>()
from ..feed import dest
ValueError: Attempted relative import in non-package

What am I missing?

 

[Remy Blank]

mypackage/
__init__.py
push/
__init__.py
dest.py
feed/
__init__py

^
Missing dot here? -----------|

In subject.py I have
from ..push import dest

But i receive the error:
Caught exception importing module subject:
File "/usr/local/python/lib/python2.5/site-packages/pychecker/
checker.py", line 621, in setupMainCode()
module = imp.load_module(self.moduleName, file, filename, smt)
File "subject.py", line 1, in <module>()
from ..feed import dest

This last line contradicts your statement above...

-- Remy

 

[Peter Otten]

mypackage/
__init__.py
push/
__init__.py
dest.py
feed/
__init__py
subject.py

In subject.py I have
from ..push import dest

But i receive the error:
Caught exception importing module subject:
File "/usr/local/python/lib/python2.5/site-packages/pychecker/
checker.py", line 621, in setupMainCode()
module = imp.load_module(self.moduleName, file, filename, smt)
File "subject.py", line 1, in <module>()
from ..feed import dest
ValueError: Attempted relative import in non-package

What am I missing?

When you run subject as a file

pychecker mypackage/feed/subject.py

subject.py is regarded as a standalone script, not as part of a package. Try

pychecker mypackage.feed.subject

instead to invoke the module via the standard import mechanism.

Peter

 

[Thomas]

mypackage/
__init__.py
push/
__init__.py
dest.py
feed/
__init__py
subject.py

In subject.py I have
from ..push import dest

There is no such thing as relative package imports. See
http://www.python.org/doc/essays/packages.html

Thomas

 

[Peter Otten]

There is no such thing as relative package imports. See
http://www.python.org/doc/essays/packages.html

Unless you are using Python 1.5 the following document is a bit more
relevant:

http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0328/

Peter

 

[Kay Schluehr]

When you run subject as a file

pychecker mypackage/feed/subject.py

subject.py is regarded as a standalone script, not as part of a package. Try

pychecker mypackage.feed.subject

instead to invoke the module via the standard import mechanism.

Peter

Since when are Python modules not regarded as standalone scripts but
as a "part of a package"?

The only indication that there is some duality and that it is relevant
at all are those relative imports that came in with Python 2.5. As it
seems this feature is justified by the artificial semantic differences
it produces.

 

[Peter Otten]

Since when are Python modules not regarded as standalone scripts but
as a "part of a package"?

The only indication that there is some duality and that it is relevant
at all are those relative imports that came in with Python 2.5. As it
seems this feature is justified by the artificial semantic differences
it produces.

I'm probably misunderstanding you, but the ambiguity I wanted to point out
has existed before and has nothing artificial:

$ tree
..
`-- mypackage
|-- __init__.py
|-- feed
| |-- __init__.py
| |-- subject.py
| `-- subject.py~
`-- push
|-- __init__.py
`-- dest.py

3 directories, 6 files
$ python2.4 -c "import mypackage.push.dest as d; print d.__name__"
mypackage.push.dest
$ cd mypackage/push/
$ python2.4 -c "import dest as d; print d.__name__"
dest

".." in the import goes one up in the package name, not in the filesystem
and therefore won't work in the second example.

Peter

 

[Thomas]

Unless you are using Python 1.5 the following document is a bit more
relevant:

http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0328/

Oups, thanks for the pointer. I thought the old doc was still valid...
(gee, there should be forward references).

Thomas