name of client module

[Jeff Schwab]

Q1: When a module is imported, is there any way for the module to
determine the name of the client code's module?

Q2: My understanding is that the code in a module is executed only on
the first import of that module. Is there any way to have a hook
invoked on subsequent imports, and for that hook (as in Q1) to determine
the name of the client module?

[Nick Stinemates]

Re: name of client module

Jeff Schwab wrote:

Q1: When a module is imported, is there any way for the module to
determine the name of the client code's module?
>

Why would you ever want to do this?

Q2: My understanding is that the code in a module is executed only on
the first import of that module. Is there any way to have a hook
invoked on subsequent imports, and for that hook (as in Q1) to determine
the name of the client module?
>

Why would you ever want to do this?

I don't really understand why you wouldn't want to do the following:

import foo
foo.exec()



--
=============== ===
Nick Stinemates (nick@stinemate s.org)

http://nick.stinemates.org

AIM: Nick Stinemates
MSN: nickstinemates@ hotmail.com
Yahoo: nickstinemates@ yahoo.com
=============== ===

[Jeff Schwab]

Re: name of client module

Nick Stinemates wrote:

Jeff Schwab wrote:

>Q1: When a module is imported, is there any way for the module to
>determine the name of the client code's module?
>>

Why would you ever want to do this?

>Q2: My understanding is that the code in a module is executed only on
>the first import of that module. Is there any way to have a hook
>invoked on subsequent imports, and for that hook (as in Q1) to determine
>the name of the client module?
>>

Why would you ever want to do this?

So that the imported module can implement functions that return
information about the client module, as a form of introspection.
Suppose I want to know whether I'm the main module, and I don't want to
write __name__ == '__main__'; it would be nice if I could import a
module and call a method to tell me whether I'm __main__:

import modinfo

if modinfo.main():
print("Hello, world")

I don't really understand why you wouldn't want to do the following:
>
import foo
foo.exec()

I'm not saying I don't want to do that. I'm saying that, in addition to
what you've written, I want foo to know it's being imported, and by whom.

[Jeff Schwab]

Re: name of client module

Nick Stinemates wrote:

>I'm not saying I don't want to do that. I'm saying that, in addition to
>what you've written, I want foo to know it's being imported, and by whom.

Please don't snip so much.

You're still not explaining a real example of what this could be used for.

Why would you say something like that? I told you *exactly* what I
wanted to use it for. See Berwyn's post on the recent thread "Double
underscores -- ugly?" He suggests that a suitable replacement for "if
__name__ == '__main__'" might be "if sys.main()". I was looking for a
way to implement that kind of function. Just like I told you when you
asked me. You snipped it, along with most of the post.

Oh well, here's an example of an implementation of what you want to do.

Thanks.

[Ben Finney]

Re: name of client module

Nick Stinemates <nick@stinemate s.orgwrites:

Ah, I snipped because I was only replying to that specific part and
thought there was an archive of the rest. If that is unconventional
I'll stop.

Please continue snipping the parts that aren't relevant to your reply.
The convention in this forum is trimmed-quote, inline-reply.

I think the complaint in this case might have been the "you snipped
bits that *were* relevant" failure mode :-)

--
\ "Madness is rare in individuals, but in groups, parties, |
`\ nations and ages it is the rule." -- Friedrich Nietzsche |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[Jeff Schwab]

Re: name of client module

Ben Finney wrote:

Nick Stinemates <nick@stinemate s.orgwrites:
>

>Ah, I snipped because I was only replying to that specific part and
>thought there was an archive of the rest. If that is unconventional
>I'll stop.

>
Please continue snipping the parts that aren't relevant to your reply.
The convention in this forum is trimmed-quote, inline-reply.
>
I think the complaint in this case might have been the "you snipped
bits that *were* relevant" failure mode :-)

What he said.