In a Python system for which I develop, we usually have this module structure.
mymodule/
mymodule/mymodule/feature.py
mymodule/test/feature.py
This allows our little testing framework to easily import test/feature.py and run unit tests. However, we now have the need for some shell scripts (which are written in Python):
mymodule/
mymodule/scripts/yetanotherfeature.py
mymodule/test/yetanotherfeature.py
yetanotherfeature.py is installed by the module Debian package into /usr/bin. But we obviously don't want the .py extension there. So, in order for the test framework to still be able to import the module I have to do this symbolic link thingie:
mymodule/
mymodule/scripts/yetanotherfeature
mymodule/scripts/yetanotherfeature.py # -> mymodule/scripts/yetanotherfeature
mymodule/test/yetanotherfeature.py
Is it possible to import a module by filename in Python, or can you think of a more elegant solution for this?
The imp module is used for this:
daniel#purplehaze:/tmp/test$ cat mymodule
print "woho!"
daniel#purplehaze:/tmp/test$ cat test.py
import imp
imp.load_source("apanapansson", "mymodule")
daniel#purplehaze:/tmp/test$ python test.py
woho!
daniel#purplehaze:/tmp/test$
You could most likely use some tricker by using import hooks, I wouldn't recommend it though. On the other hand I would also probably do it the other way around , have your .py scripts somewhere, and make '.py'less symbolic links to the .py files. So your library could be anywhere and you can run the test from within by importing it normall (since it has the py extension), and then /usr/bin/yetanotherfeature points to it, so you can run it without the py.
Edit: Nevermind this (at least the hooks part), the import imp solution looks very good to me :)
Check out imp module:
http://docs.python.org/library/imp.html
This will allow you to load a module by filename. But I think your symbolic link is a more elegant solution.
Another option would be to use setuptools:
"...there’s no easy way to have a script’s filename match local conventions on both Windows and POSIX platforms. For another, you often have to create a separate file just for the “main” script, when your actual “main” is a function in a module somewhere... setuptools fixes all of these problems by automatically generating scripts for you with the correct extension, and on Windows it will even create an .exe file..."
https://pythonhosted.org/setuptools/setuptools.html#automatic-script-creation
Related
I have a specific problem which might require a general solution. I am currently learning apache thrift. I used this guide.I followed all the steps and i am getting a import error as Cannot import module UserManager. So the question being How does python import lookup take place. Which directory is checked first. How does it move upwards?
How does sys.path.append('') work?
I found out the answer for this here. I followed the same steps. But i am still facing the same issue. Any ideas why? Anything more i should put up that could help debug you guys. ?
Help is appreciated.
On windows, Python looks up modules from the Lib folder in the default python path, for example from "C:\Python34\Lib\". You can add your Python libaries in a custom folder ("my-lib" or sth.) in there, but you need a file in order to tell Python that you can import from there. This file is called __init__.py , and is totally empty. That data structure should look like this:
my-lib
__init__.py
/myfolder
mymodule.py
(This is how every Python module works. For example urllib.request, it's at "%PYTHONPATH%\Lib\urllib\request.py")
You can import from the "mymodule.py" file by typing
import my-lib
and then using
mylib.mymodule.myfunction
or you can use
from my-lib import mymodule
And then just using the name of you function.
You can now use sys.path.append to append the path you pass into the function to the folders Python looks for the modules (Please note that thats not permanent). If the path of your modules should be static, you should consider putting these in the Lib folder. If that path is relative to your file you could look for the path of the file you execute from, and then append the sys.path relative to your file, but i reccomend using relative imports.
If you consider doing that, i recommend reading the docs, you can do that here: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/import.html#submodules
If I got you right, you're using Python 3.3 from Blender but try to include the 3.2 standard library. This is bound to give you a flurry of issues, you should not do that. Find another way. It's likely that Blender offers a way to use the 3.3 standard library (and that's 99% compatible with 3.2). Pure-Python third party library can, of course, be included by fiddling with sys.path.
The specific issue you're seeing now is likely caused by the version difference. As people have pointed out in the comments, Python 3.3 doesn't find the _tkinter extension module. Although it is present (as it works from Python 3.2), it is most likely in a .so file with an ABI tag that is incompatible with Blender's Python 3.3, hence it won't even look at it (much like a module.txt is not considered for import module). This is a good thing. Extension modules are highly version-specific, slight ABI mismatches (such as between 3.2 and 3.3, or two 3.3 compiled with different options) can cause pretty much any kind of error, from crashes to memory leaks to silent data corruption or even something completely different.
You can verify whether this is the case via import _tkinter; print(_tkinter.file) in the 3.2 shell. Alternatively, _tkinter may live in a different directory entirely. Adding that directory won't actually fix the real issue outlined above.
For any new readers coming along that are still having issues, try the following. This is cleaner than using sys.path.append if your app directory is structured with your .py files that contain functions for import underneath your script that imports those files. Let me illustrate.
Script that imports files: main.py
Function files named like: func1.py
main.py
/functionfolder
__init__.py
func1.py
func2.py
The import code in your main.py file should look as follows:
from functionfolder import func1
from functionfolder import func2
As Agilix correctly stated, you must have an __init__.py file in your "functionfolder" (see directory illustration above).
In addition, this solved my issue with Pylance not resolving the import, and showing me a nagging error constantly. After a rabbit-hole of sifting through GitHub issues, and trying too many comparatively complicated proposed solutions, this ever-so-simple solution worked for me.
You may try with declaring sys.path.append('/path/to/lib/python') before including any IMPORT statements.
I just created a __init__.py file inside my new folder, so the directory is initialised, and it worked (:
I am starting to convert a lot of C stuff in python 3.
In C I defined a directory called "Toolbox", where i put all my functions i needed in different programs, so called libraries.
To use a specific library i had just to add the line
#include "/home/User/Toolbox/VectorFunctions.h"
into my source. So i was able to use the same library in different sources.
In python i tried to write some Toolbox functions and implement them into the source with import VectorFunctions, which works, as long as the file VectorFunctions.py is in the same directory as the source.
I there a way (I think there must be one...) telling python that VectorFunctions.py is located in a different directory, e.g. /home/User/Python_Toolbox?
Thanks for any comment!
What I would do is to organize these toolbox functions into one installable Python package bruno_toolbox, with its setup.py, and then install it into development mode to system site packages, using python setup.py develop, and then use the bruno_toolbox like any other package on the system, everywhere. Then if that package feels useful, I'd publish it to PyPI for the benefit of everyone.
You can use python path. Writing this code beginning of your program :
import sys
sys.path.append('/home/User/Python_Toolbox')
If you have VectorFunctions.py in this folder you can import it :
import VectorFunctions
I am creating a Python package with multiple modules. I want to make sure that when I import modules within the package that they are importing only from the package and not something outside the package that has the same name.
Is the correct way of doing this is to use relative imports? Will this interfere when I move my package to a different location on my machine (or gets installed wherever on a customer's machine)?
Modern relative imports (here's a reference) are package-relative and package-specific, so as long as the internal structure of your package does not change you can move the package as a whole around wherever you want.
While Joran Beasley's answer should work as well (though does not seem necessary in those older versions of Python where absolute imports aren't the default, as the old style of importing checked within the package's directory first), I personally don't really like modifying the import path like that when you don't have to, especially if you need to load some of those other packages or modules that your modules or packages now shadow.
A warning, however: these do require that the module in question is loaded as part of a package, or at least have their __name__ set to indicate a location in a package. Relative imports won't work for a module when __name__ == '__main__', so if you're writing a simple/casual script that utilizes another module in the same directory as it (and want to make sure the script will refer to the proper directory, things won't work right if the current working directory is not set to the script's), you could do something like import os, sys; sys.path.insert(0, os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(__file__))) (with thanks to https://stackoverflow.com/a/1432949/138772 for the idea). As noted in S.Lott's answer to the same question, this probably isn't something you'd want to do professionally or as part of a team project, but for something personal where you're just doing some menial task automation or the like it should be fine.
the sys.path tells python where to look for imports
add
import sys
sys.path.insert(0,".")
to the top of your main python script this will ensure local packages are imported BEFORE builtin packages (although tbh I think this happens automagically)
if you really want to import only packages in your folder do
import sys
sys.path = ["."]
however I do not recommend this at all as it will probably break lots of your stuff ...
most IDE's (eclipse/pycharm/etc) provide mechanisms to set up the environment a project uses including its paths
really the best option is not to name packages the same as builtin packages or 3rd party modules that are installed on your system
also the best option is to distribute it via a correctly bundled package, this should more than suffice
I need to ship a collection of Python programs that use multiple packages stored in a local Library directory: the goal is to avoid having users install packages before using my programs (the packages are shipped in the Library directory). What is the best way of importing the packages contained in Library?
I tried three methods, but none of them appears perfect: is there a simpler and robust method? or is one of these methods the best one can do?
In the first method, the Library folder is simply added to the library path:
import sys
import os
sys.path.insert(0, os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), 'Library'))
import package_from_Library
The Library folder is put at the beginning so that the packages shipped with my programs have priority over the same modules installed by the user (this way I am sure that they have the correct version to work with my programs). This method also works when the Library folder is not in the current directory, which is good. However, this approach has drawbacks. Each and every one of my programs adds a copy of the same path to sys.path, which is a waste. In addition, all programs must contain the same three path-modifying lines, which goes against the Don't Repeat Yourself principle.
An improvement over the above problems consists in trying to add the Library path only once, by doing it in an imported module:
# In module add_Library_path:
sys.path.insert(0, os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), 'Library'))
and then to use, in each of my programs:
import add_Library_path
import package_from_Library
This way, thanks to the caching mechanism of CPython, the module add_Library_path is only run once, and the Library path is added only once to sys.path. However, a drawback of this approach is that import add_Library_path has an invisible side effect, and that the order of the imports matters: this makes the code less legible, and more fragile. Also, this forces my distribution of programs to inlude an add_Library_path.py program that users will not use.
Python modules from Library can also be imported by making it a package (empty __init__.py file stored inside), which allows one to do:
from Library import module_from_Library
However, this breaks for packages in Library, as they might do something like from xlutils.filter import …, which breaks because xlutils is not found in sys.path. So, this method works, but only when including modules in Library, not packages.
All these methods have some drawback.
Is there a better way of shipping programs with a collection of packages (that they use) stored in a local Library directory? or is one of the methods above (method 1?) the best one can do?
PS: In my case, all the packages from Library are pure Python packages, but a more general solution that works for any operating system is best.
PPS: The goal is that the user be able to use my programs without having to install anything (beyond copying the directory I ship them regularly), like in the examples above.
PPPS: More precisely, the goal is to have the flexibility of easily updating both my collection of programs and their associated third-party packages from Library by having my users do a simple copy of a directory containing my programs and the Library folder of "hidden" third-party packages. (I do frequent updates, so I prefer not forcing the users to update their Python distribution too.)
Messing around with sys.path() leads to pain... The modern package template and Distribute contain a vast array of information and were in part set up to solve your problem.
What I would do is to set up setup.py to install all your packages to a specific site-packages location or if you could do it to the system's site-packages. In the former case, the local site-packages would then be added to the PYTHONPATH of the system/user. In the latter case, nothing needs to changes
You could use the batch file to set the python path as well. Or change the python executable to point to a shell script that contains a modified PYTHONPATH and then executes the python interpreter. The latter of course, means that you have to have access to the user's machine, which you do not. However, if your users only run scripts and do not import your own libraries, you could use your own wrapper for scripts:
#!/path/to/my/python
And the /path/to/my/python script would be something like:
#!/bin/sh
PYTHONPATH=/whatever/lib/path:$PYTHONPATH /usr/bin/python $*
I think you should have a look at path import hooks which allow to modify the behaviour of python when searching for modules.
For example you could try to do something like kde's scriptengine does for python plugins[1].
It adds a special token to sys.path(like "<plasmaXXXXXX>" with XXXXXX being a random number just to avoid name collisions) and then when python try to import modules and can't find them in the other paths, it will call your importer which can deal with it.
A simpler alternative is to have a main script used as launcher which simply adds the path to sys.path and execute the target file(so that you can safely avoid putting the sys.path.append(...) line on every file).
Yet an other alternative, that works on python2.6+, would be to install the library under the per-user site-packages directory.
[1] You can find the source code under /usr/share/kde4/apps/plasma_scriptengine_python in a linux installation with kde.
I do a lot of work on different projects (I'm a scientist) in a fairly standardised directory structure. e.g.:
project
/analyses/
/lib
/doc
/results
/bin
I put all my various utility scripts in /bin/ because cleanliness is next to godliness. However, I have to hard code paths (e.g. ../../x/y/z) and then I have to run things within ./bin/ or they break.
I've used Django and that has /manage.py which runs various django-things and automatically handles the path. I've also used fabric to run various user defined functions.
Question: How do I do something similar? and what's the best way? I can easily write something in /manage.py to inject the root dir into sys.path etc, but then I'd like to be able to do "./manage.py foo" which would run /bin/foo.py. Or is it possible to get fabric to call executables from a certain directory?
Basically - I want something easy and low maintenance. I want to be able to drop an executable script/file/whatever into ./bin/ and not have to deal with path issues or import issues.
What is the best way to do this?
Keep Execution at TLD
In general, try to keep your runtime at top-level. This will straighten out your imports tremendously.
If you have to do a lot of import addressing with relative imports, there's probably a
better way.
Modifying The Path
Other poster's have mentioned the PYTHONPATH. That's a great way to do it permanently in your shell.
If you don't want to/aren't able to manipulate the PYTHONPATH project path directly you can use sys.path to get yourself out of relative import hell.
Using sys.path.append
sys.path is just a list internally. You can append to it to add stuff to into your path.
Say I'm in /bin and there's a library markdown in lib/. You can append a relative paths with sys.path to import what you want.
import sys
sys.path.append('../lib')
import markdown
print markdown.markdown("""
Hello world!
------------
""")
Word to the wise: Don't get too crazy with your sys.path additions. Keep your schema simple to avoid yourself a lot confusion.
Overly eager imports can sometimes lead to cases where a python module needs to import itself, at which point execution will halt!
Using Packages and __init__.py
Another great trick is creating python packages by adding __init__.py files. __init__.py gets loaded before any other modules in the directory, so it's a great way to add imports across the entire directory. This makes it an ideal spot to add sys.path hackery.
You don't even need to necessarily add anything to the file. It's sufficient to just do touch __init__.py at the console to make a directory a package.
See this SO post for a more concrete example.
In a shell script that you source (not run) in your current shell you set the following environment variables:
PATH=$PATH:$PROJECTDIR/bin
PYTHONPATH=$PROJECTDIR/lib
Then you put your Python modules and package tree in your projects ./lib directory. Python automatically adds the PYTHONPATH environment variable to sys.path.
Then you can run any top-level script from the shell without specifying the path, and any imports from your library modules are looked for in the lib directory.
I recommend very simple top-level scripts, such as:
#!/usr/bin/python
import sys
import mytool
mytool.main(sys.argv)
Then you never have to change that, you just edit the module code, and also benefit from the byte-code caching.
You can easily achieve your goals by creating a mini package that hosts each one of your projects. Use paste scripts to create a simple project skeleton. And to make it executable, just install it via setup.py develop. Now your bin scripts just need to import the entry point to this package and execute it.