代码样式-“扁平化"包的名称空间 [英] Code style - "flattening" a package's namespace

问题描述

我的包裹层次结构:

InstrumentController/
    __init__.py
    instruments/
        __init__.py
        _BaseInstrument.py
        Keithley2000.py
        # etc...

仪器文件的内容:

# _BaseInstrument.py
class _BaseInstrument(object):
    """Base class for instruments"""
    # etc...

# Keithley2000.py
from InstrumentController.instruments._BaseInstrument import _BaseInstrument
class Keithley2000(_BaseInstrument):
    # etc...

我希望我的用户能够访问这些类而不必深入研究模块的层次结构.他们只需要键入from InstrumentController.instruments import Keithley2000，而不是from InstrumentController.instruments.Keithley2000 import Keithley2000.

I want my users to be able to access the classes without having to delve into a hierarchy of modules. They should just have to type from InstrumentController.instruments import Keithley2000, not from InstrumentController.instruments.Keithley2000 import Keithley2000.

为此，我在InstrumentController.instruments.__init__中有一堆这样的行:

For this purpose I have a bunch of lines like this in InstrumentController.instruments.__init__:

from .Keithley2000 import Keithley2000
from .StanfordSR830 import StanfordSR830
# etc...

因此，现在这些类位于包名称空间的 top 而不是子模块中.我的问题是:这是个好主意吗?这些类与它们所属的模块具有相同的名称，因此在顶级导入该类会使该模块不可用.这让我有些胆怯-有更好的方法吗?

So now the classes sit at the top of the package's namespace, rather than in submodules. My question is: is this a good idea? The classes have the same name as the modules to which they belong, so importing the class at the top level renders the module unavailable. This makes me a little squeamish - is there a better way of doing this?

推荐答案

您的做法是可以接受的，但是我建议您将所有程序包/模块名称的大小写改为1)，即惯例

How you are doing it is acceptable, but I recommend that you recase all package/module names to lowercase as 1) that is the convention specified in PEP 8, and 2) it will remove your shadowing issue.

这篇关于代码样式-“扁平化"包的名称空间的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！