[Python-ideas] Jump to function as an an alternative to call function

[Brice Parent]

Le 16/08/2018 à 20:34, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:31:28AM +0200, Brice Parent wrote:
>
>> If I understand well the need (I'm unsure I've had it myself), it would
>> be easier to be able to import the function in the active context, like
>> this:
>>
>> def foo(a):
>>      return a + c
>>
>> def bar(a, c):
>>      return foo(a)
>>
>> def bazz(a, c):
>>      import __file__.foo
>>      return foo(a)
> [...]
>> I'm not saying the syntax is the one that should be used (__file__
>> possibly not existing may be a problem), not even saying that we should
>> have this. I'm just showing a way to do the same thing with an easier
>> (to me) syntax.
> The problem isn't that __file__ doesn't exist, it is that import DOES
> exist and does something completely unsuitable:
>
> [...]
That's what I was trying to say: I'm not proposing a syntax or any 
specific solution.
It was more about graphically explaining that I found more explicit 
(that word again...) to import (or copy, or insert) the target function 
inside the active scope than to have it done when you call the function 
itself.