Calling it python.exe would make the most sense for people who don't
look behind the curtain, but I agree it could potentially be confusing
for people. Further, we would need to ensure we didn't create an
infinite loop where the launcher python.exe found a python.exe it
thought was an appropriate sub-process, but where it turns out it is
actually another launcher.
Having it installed by the Python installer also makes sense to me but
I'd be very interested in Martin's take on this (and also on everything
else we are discussing here).
I think I would be opposed to adding a launcher to 2.7. It also
wouldn't be necessary - if it was released with 3.3, then it could
still do version switching for 2.7.
If it's called "python.exe", I wonder what it should do when given a
file that doesn't carry version information.
I suspect most people just
find it more convenient to launch such scripts from a console. Maybe a
quick poll on python-list would be reasonable...
I certainly have script files that I double-click. However, those happen
to be batch files, not Python. If I would do scripting in Python (which
I don't do much these days), I would like to be able to double-click
them. I always write my scripts so that they don't give exceptions :-)
Actually, the one Python script I run regularly is msi.py, and I
currently launch it in a terminal window, because I need to run it with
c:\python25\python.exe, which double-clicking won't do for me. If I
could double-click it, I would like that more (there is also the issue
that the script needs the VS envvars set, so I'd need to find a solution
to that, also).
Regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
