PEP 8规定:
导入总是放在文件的顶部，就在任何模块注释和文档字符串之后，在模块全局变量和常量之前。
然而，如果我导入的类/方法/函数只在很少的情况下使用，那么在需要时进行导入肯定会更有效吗?
这不是:
class SomeClass(object):
def not_often_called(self)
from datetime import datetime
self.datetime = datetime.now()
比这更有效率?
from datetime import datetime
class SomeClass(object):
def not_often_called(self)
self.datetime = datetime.now()
当前回答
这就像许多其他优化一样——你牺牲了一些可读性来换取速度。正如John提到的，如果您已经完成了分析作业，并且发现这是一个非常有用的更改，并且您需要额外的速度，那么就去做吧。最好把所有其他的导入都放在一起:
from foo import bar
from baz import qux
# Note: datetime is imported in SomeClass below
其他回答
这就像许多其他优化一样——你牺牲了一些可读性来换取速度。正如John提到的，如果您已经完成了分析作业，并且发现这是一个非常有用的更改，并且您需要额外的速度，那么就去做吧。最好把所有其他的导入都放在一起:
from foo import bar
from baz import qux
# Note: datetime is imported in SomeClass below
我很惊讶没有看到重复负载检查的实际成本数字，尽管有很多很好的解释。
如果你在顶部导入，不管发生什么，你都要加载命中。这非常小，但通常是毫秒级，而不是纳秒级。
If you import within a function(s), then you only take the hit for loading if and when one of those functions is first called. As many have pointed out, if that doesn't happen at all, you save the load time. But if the function(s) get called a lot, you take a repeated though much smaller hit (for checking that it has been loaded; not for actually re-loading). On the other hand, as @aaronasterling pointed out you also save a little because importing within a function lets the function use slightly-faster local variable lookups to identify the name later (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/477096/python-import-coding-style/4789963#4789963).
下面是一个简单测试的结果，该测试从函数内部导入了一些内容。报告的时间(在2.3 GHz Intel Core i7上的Python 2.7.14中)如下所示(第2个调用比后面的调用多似乎是一致的，尽管我不知道为什么)。
0 foo: 14429.0924 µs
1 foo: 63.8962 µs
2 foo: 10.0136 µs
3 foo: 7.1526 µs
4 foo: 7.8678 µs
0 bar: 9.0599 µs
1 bar: 6.9141 µs
2 bar: 7.1526 µs
3 bar: 7.8678 µs
4 bar: 7.1526 µs
代码:
from __future__ import print_function
from time import time
def foo():
import collections
import re
import string
import math
import subprocess
return
def bar():
import collections
import re
import string
import math
import subprocess
return
t0 = time()
for i in xrange(5):
foo()
t1 = time()
print(" %2d foo: %12.4f \xC2\xB5s" % (i, (t1-t0)*1E6))
t0 = t1
for i in xrange(5):
bar()
t1 = time()
print(" %2d bar: %12.4f \xC2\xB5s" % (i, (t1-t0)*1E6))
t0 = t1
有趣的是，到目前为止，没有一个回答提到并行处理，当序列化的函数代码被推到其他核心时，可能需要将导入放在函数中，例如在ipyparallel的情况下。
当函数被调用0次或1次时，第一种变体确实比第二种更有效。然而，对于第二次和后续调用，“导入每个调用”方法实际上效率较低。请参阅此链接，了解一种通过“惰性导入”将两种方法的优点结合起来的惰性加载技术。
但除了效率之外，还有其他原因可以解释为什么你会更喜欢其中一种。一种方法是让阅读代码的人更清楚地了解这个模块所具有的依赖关系。它们也有非常不同的失败特征——如果没有“datetime”模块，第一个将在加载时失败，而第二个直到方法被调用才会失败。
补充说明:在IronPython中，导入可能比在CPython中要昂贵一些，因为代码基本上是在导入时被编译的。
以下是对这个问题的最新答案总结 而且 相关的 的问题。
PEP 8 recommends putting imports at the top. It's often more convenient to get ImportErrors when you first run your program rather than when your program first calls your function. Putting imports in the function scope can help avoid issues with circular imports. Putting imports in the function scope helps keep maintain a clean module namespace, so that it does not appear among tab-completion suggestions. Start-up time: imports in a function won't run until (if) that function is called. Might get significant with heavy-weight libraries. Even though import statements are super fast on subsequent runs, they still incur a speed penalty which can be significant if the function is trivial but frequently in use. Imports under the __name__ == "__main__" guard seem very reasonable. Refactoring might be easier if the imports are located in the function where they're used (facilitates moving it to another module). It can also be argued that this is good for readability. However, most would argue the contrary, i.e. Imports at the top enhance readability, since you can see all your dependencies at a glance. It seems unclear if dynamic or conditional imports favour one style over another.
