Difference between “from .checks import *” and “from . import checks”












0















I have a file called checks.py in my project.
I want to import everything at once.



Is there a difference between these two or is it just another way of writing it?



from .checks import *



from . import checks





python







share|improve this question


















  • 1





    Try accessing checks.foo one way or the other later on in the code, and you'll see a difference.

    – deceze♦
    Nov 14 '18 at 7:14


















0















I have a file called checks.py in my project.
I want to import everything at once.



Is there a difference between these two or is it just another way of writing it?



from .checks import *



from . import checks





python







share|improve this question


















  • 1





    Try accessing checks.foo one way or the other later on in the code, and you'll see a difference.

    – deceze♦
    Nov 14 '18 at 7:14
















0












0








0








I have a file called checks.py in my project.
I want to import everything at once.



Is there a difference between these two or is it just another way of writing it?



from .checks import *



from . import checks





python







share|improve this question














I have a file called checks.py in my project.
I want to import everything at once.



Is there a difference between these two or is it just another way of writing it?



from .checks import *



from . import checks





python




python






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Nov 14 '18 at 7:04









saschasascha

6943923




6943923








  • 1





    Try accessing checks.foo one way or the other later on in the code, and you'll see a difference.

    – deceze♦
    Nov 14 '18 at 7:14
















  • 1





    Try accessing checks.foo one way or the other later on in the code, and you'll see a difference.

    – deceze♦
    Nov 14 '18 at 7:14










1




1





Try accessing checks.foo one way or the other later on in the code, and you'll see a difference.

– deceze♦
Nov 14 '18 at 7:14







Try accessing checks.foo one way or the other later on in the code, and you'll see a difference.

– deceze♦
Nov 14 '18 at 7:14














2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















5














In the first one, to access a member of checks, simply type the member's name (because you are importing all members). e.g.



from .checks import *

foo(5) # foo is member of checks


In the second one, you are only importing checks, which means to access foo, you must write checks.foo(5) as opposed to just foo(5).



Just a namespace thing, no big differences otherwise.



EDIT: As mentioned by @mata, typically in bigger projects imports with *s can get confusing, as you have no idea what module foo came from, and this is an even bigger problem if foo is a member of more than one module you are importing. Thus, importing using *s is considered bad practise.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    Big difference is that if you have more then one * import you won't be able to easily tell where your foo came from. What if two modules have members with colliding names? For such reasons * imports are regarded as bad style.

    – mata
    Nov 14 '18 at 7:21





















1














First, understand the meaning of the from somewhere import something, where somewhere refers to the directory where a certain package resides or the package itself, and something is a certain package or a feature from a particular package.



In your case, what you are trying to achieve is something called relative import. The from .<module/package> import something refers to a relative import. You can find more information on absolute and relative imports here.



Now, coming to your original question. Yes, there is a difference.



The from .checks import * statement will import all the classes/functions available inside the checks.py file. That is if your checks.py file contains a function named, let's say foo, then after executing this import statement you would be able to call foo() directly.



The from . import checks statement will import the module named checks. Hence, after executing this statement, you would be able to use/call any classes/function by following <module>.<class/function> notation. Therefore, in order to use foo() function, you have to use the syntax checks.foo()



Note: In both the cases, the file checks.py should be residing inside the current directory. The . refers to a relative path, in this case to the current directory.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    });
    });
    }, "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "1"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53294743%2fdifference-between-from-checks-import-and-from-import-checks%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    5














    In the first one, to access a member of checks, simply type the member's name (because you are importing all members). e.g.



    from .checks import *
    
foo(5) # foo is member of checks


    In the second one, you are only importing checks, which means to access foo, you must write checks.foo(5) as opposed to just foo(5).



    Just a namespace thing, no big differences otherwise.



    EDIT: As mentioned by @mata, typically in bigger projects imports with *s can get confusing, as you have no idea what module foo came from, and this is an even bigger problem if foo is a member of more than one module you are importing. Thus, importing using *s is considered bad practise.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 1





      Big difference is that if you have more then one * import you won't be able to easily tell where your foo came from. What if two modules have members with colliding names? For such reasons * imports are regarded as bad style.

      – mata
      Nov 14 '18 at 7:21


















    5














    In the first one, to access a member of checks, simply type the member's name (because you are importing all members). e.g.



    from .checks import *
    
foo(5) # foo is member of checks


    In the second one, you are only importing checks, which means to access foo, you must write checks.foo(5) as opposed to just foo(5).



    Just a namespace thing, no big differences otherwise.



    EDIT: As mentioned by @mata, typically in bigger projects imports with *s can get confusing, as you have no idea what module foo came from, and this is an even bigger problem if foo is a member of more than one module you are importing. Thus, importing using *s is considered bad practise.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 1





      Big difference is that if you have more then one * import you won't be able to easily tell where your foo came from. What if two modules have members with colliding names? For such reasons * imports are regarded as bad style.

      – mata
      Nov 14 '18 at 7:21
















    5












    5








    5







    In the first one, to access a member of checks, simply type the member's name (because you are importing all members). e.g.



    from .checks import *
    
foo(5) # foo is member of checks


    In the second one, you are only importing checks, which means to access foo, you must write checks.foo(5) as opposed to just foo(5).



    Just a namespace thing, no big differences otherwise.



    EDIT: As mentioned by @mata, typically in bigger projects imports with *s can get confusing, as you have no idea what module foo came from, and this is an even bigger problem if foo is a member of more than one module you are importing. Thus, importing using *s is considered bad practise.






    share|improve this answer















    In the first one, to access a member of checks, simply type the member's name (because you are importing all members). e.g.



    from .checks import *
    
foo(5) # foo is member of checks


    In the second one, you are only importing checks, which means to access foo, you must write checks.foo(5) as opposed to just foo(5).



    Just a namespace thing, no big differences otherwise.



    EDIT: As mentioned by @mata, typically in bigger projects imports with *s can get confusing, as you have no idea what module foo came from, and this is an even bigger problem if foo is a member of more than one module you are importing. Thus, importing using *s is considered bad practise.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Dec 6 '18 at 4:22

























    answered Nov 14 '18 at 7:16









    Tomothy32Tomothy32

    4,7011322




    4,7011322








    • 1





      Big difference is that if you have more then one * import you won't be able to easily tell where your foo came from. What if two modules have members with colliding names? For such reasons * imports are regarded as bad style.

      – mata
      Nov 14 '18 at 7:21
















    • 1





      Big difference is that if you have more then one * import you won't be able to easily tell where your foo came from. What if two modules have members with colliding names? For such reasons * imports are regarded as bad style.

      – mata
      Nov 14 '18 at 7:21










    1




    1





    Big difference is that if you have more then one * import you won't be able to easily tell where your foo came from. What if two modules have members with colliding names? For such reasons * imports are regarded as bad style.

    – mata
    Nov 14 '18 at 7:21







    Big difference is that if you have more then one * import you won't be able to easily tell where your foo came from. What if two modules have members with colliding names? For such reasons * imports are regarded as bad style.

    – mata
    Nov 14 '18 at 7:21















    1














    First, understand the meaning of the from somewhere import something, where somewhere refers to the directory where a certain package resides or the package itself, and something is a certain package or a feature from a particular package.



    In your case, what you are trying to achieve is something called relative import. The from .<module/package> import something refers to a relative import. You can find more information on absolute and relative imports here.



    Now, coming to your original question. Yes, there is a difference.



    The from .checks import * statement will import all the classes/functions available inside the checks.py file. That is if your checks.py file contains a function named, let's say foo, then after executing this import statement you would be able to call foo() directly.



    The from . import checks statement will import the module named checks. Hence, after executing this statement, you would be able to use/call any classes/function by following <module>.<class/function> notation. Therefore, in order to use foo() function, you have to use the syntax checks.foo()



    Note: In both the cases, the file checks.py should be residing inside the current directory. The . refers to a relative path, in this case to the current directory.






    share|improve this answer




























      1














      First, understand the meaning of the from somewhere import something, where somewhere refers to the directory where a certain package resides or the package itself, and something is a certain package or a feature from a particular package.



      In your case, what you are trying to achieve is something called relative import. The from .<module/package> import something refers to a relative import. You can find more information on absolute and relative imports here.



      Now, coming to your original question. Yes, there is a difference.



      The from .checks import * statement will import all the classes/functions available inside the checks.py file. That is if your checks.py file contains a function named, let's say foo, then after executing this import statement you would be able to call foo() directly.



      The from . import checks statement will import the module named checks. Hence, after executing this statement, you would be able to use/call any classes/function by following <module>.<class/function> notation. Therefore, in order to use foo() function, you have to use the syntax checks.foo()



      Note: In both the cases, the file checks.py should be residing inside the current directory. The . refers to a relative path, in this case to the current directory.






      share|improve this answer


























        1












        1








        1







        First, understand the meaning of the from somewhere import something, where somewhere refers to the directory where a certain package resides or the package itself, and something is a certain package or a feature from a particular package.



        In your case, what you are trying to achieve is something called relative import. The from .<module/package> import something refers to a relative import. You can find more information on absolute and relative imports here.



        Now, coming to your original question. Yes, there is a difference.



        The from .checks import * statement will import all the classes/functions available inside the checks.py file. That is if your checks.py file contains a function named, let's say foo, then after executing this import statement you would be able to call foo() directly.



        The from . import checks statement will import the module named checks. Hence, after executing this statement, you would be able to use/call any classes/function by following <module>.<class/function> notation. Therefore, in order to use foo() function, you have to use the syntax checks.foo()



        Note: In both the cases, the file checks.py should be residing inside the current directory. The . refers to a relative path, in this case to the current directory.






        share|improve this answer













        First, understand the meaning of the from somewhere import something, where somewhere refers to the directory where a certain package resides or the package itself, and something is a certain package or a feature from a particular package.



        In your case, what you are trying to achieve is something called relative import. The from .<module/package> import something refers to a relative import. You can find more information on absolute and relative imports here.



        Now, coming to your original question. Yes, there is a difference.



        The from .checks import * statement will import all the classes/functions available inside the checks.py file. That is if your checks.py file contains a function named, let's say foo, then after executing this import statement you would be able to call foo() directly.



        The from . import checks statement will import the module named checks. Hence, after executing this statement, you would be able to use/call any classes/function by following <module>.<class/function> notation. Therefore, in order to use foo() function, you have to use the syntax checks.foo()



        Note: In both the cases, the file checks.py should be residing inside the current directory. The . refers to a relative path, in this case to the current directory.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Nov 14 '18 at 8:02









        Dhruv JoshiDhruv Joshi

        6625




        6625






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53294743%2fdifference-between-from-checks-import-and-from-import-checks%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            List item for chat from Array inside array React Native

            Image
            0 This is my code for Chat Box, the window where I have "In" and "Out" messages are appearing. import React, { Component } from "react"; import { StyleSheet, Text, View, TouchableOpacity, TextInput, FlatList, Platform, AsyncStorage } from "react-native"; import Tutor from "../image/krutika.jpg"; import { Container, Header, Left, Input, Body, Right, Thumbnail, Button } from "native-base"; import FontAwesome from "react-native-vector-icons/FontAwesome"; import Ionicons from "react-native-vector-icons/Ionicons"; import Icon1 from "react-native-vector-icons/FontAwesome"; import axios from "axios"; export default class ChatBox extends Component { st...
            Read more

            Thiostrepton

            Image
            Thiostrepton [1] Names Other names Alaninamide, Bryamycin, Thiactin Identifiers CAS Number 1393-48-2   Y 3D model (JSmol) Interactive image ChEMBL ChEMBL468719   N ECHA InfoCard 100.014.304 PubChem CID 16130278 InChI InChI=1S/C72H85N19O18S5/c1-14-26(3)47-63(105)78-30(7)57(99)75-28(5)56(98)76-31(8)58(100)91-72-19-18-40(66-85-43(22-111-66)59(101)77-29(6)55(97)74-27(4)54(73)96)81-52(72)42-21-112-67(83-42)49(34(11)109-69(107)41-20-37(32(9)92)36-16-17-39(79-47)51(95)50(36)80-41)89-60(102)44-24-113-68(86-44)53(71(13,108)35(12)94)90-62(104)45-23-110-65(84-45)38(15-2)82-64(106)48(33(10)93)88-61(103)46-25-114-70(72)87-46/h15-17,20-22,24-26,30-35,39,45,47-49,51-53,79,92-95,108H,4-6,14,18-19,23H2,1-3,7-13H3,(H2,73,96)(H,74,97)(H,75,99)(H,76,98)(H,77,101)(H,78,105)(H,82,106)(H,88,103)(H,89,102)(H,90,104)(H,91,100)/b38-15-/t26-,30-,31-,32-,33+,34+,35+,39+,45+,47-,48-,49-,51-,52+,53+,71+,72+/m0/s1 Key: NSFFHOGKXHRQEW-AIHSUZKVSA-N ...
            Read more

            Caerphilly

            Image
            This article is about the town of Caerphilly. For the cheese of the same name, see Caerphilly cheese. For other uses, see Caerphilly (disambiguation). Caerphilly Welsh: Caerffili Caerphilly Castle Caerphilly Location within Caerphilly Population 30,388  OS grid reference ST1586 Principal area Caerphilly Ceremonial county Gwent Country Wales Sovereign state United Kingdom Post town CAERPHILLY Postcode district CF83 Dialling code 029 Police Gwent Fire South Wales Ambulance Welsh EU Parliament Wales UK Parliament Caerphilly Welsh Assembly Caerphilly List of places UK Wales Caerphilly 51°34′41″N 3°13′05″W  /  51.578°N 3.218°W  / 51.578; -3.218 Coordinates: 51°34′41″N 3°13′05″W  /  51.578°N 3.218°W  / 51.578; -3.218 Caerphilly ( / k aɪər ˈ f ɪ l i / ; Welsh: Caerffili , Welsh pronunciation:  [ˌkɑːɨrˈfɪlɪ] ) is a town and community in South Wales, at the southern end of the Rhymney Valley....
            Read more