Message186922
| Author |
pje |
| Recipients |
barry, brett.cannon, eric.snow, isoschiz, kristjan.jonsson, methane, ncoghlan, pconnell, pje |
| Date |
2013年04月14日.14:34:58 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<CALeMXf7iZb94v-C9hK3bWXVfWboK++FTERAucnHHs+bjX8fk2Q@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<1365925912.95.0.799491999036.issue17636@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Nick Coghlan <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> Your analysis is one of the pieces that was missing,
Unfortunately, I just noticed it's actually incorrect in a pretty
important part In my original example, I said, "because of the
circularity, this will *also* happen if you import 'a' first." This
statement is actually false. Importing 'a' first in that example will
result in a.util == b.util:util, not a.util=b.util. I made the
mistake because I was for some reason thinking that 'a' was going to
execute its import while being imported from b.util, and in that
scenario it will not.
That means there *is* an ordering dependency, and an ambiguity like
this one can lie dormant until long after you've introduced the
circularity. :-( |
|