From: Johan Nilsson (r.johan.nilsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-05 02:44:18
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> On Monday 04 June 2007 12:45, Johan Nilsson wrote:
[snip]
>> Sorry for intruding, but what kind of "fix" would that be? IMHO I
>> don't think that "testing" should be imported implicitly.
>
> I actually planned to implicitly import 'testing'. Now, pretty much
> everything
> is automatically imported, with 'testing' being an exception.
I didn't know that, did it change recently. Are e.g. path, os, set,
class, regex now being imported?
> Do you
> think
> it's better to require manual import of 'testing'?
I _personally_ prefer to manually import testing whenever I need it. I
actually prefer to import most non-basic stuff explicitly - especially
when the rules end up in the "global namespace", such as unit-test.
Perhaps it is a bit unintuitive that e.g. importing the testing module
makes "unqualified" rules available, i.e. "unit-test" instead of
"testing.unit-test"?
/ Johan