On 23/03/2011 01:30, Mark Hammond wrote:
On 23/03/2011 6:12 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
On 22/03/2011 07:21, Mark Hammond wrote:
Hi all,
I've made some changes to the draft PEP and checked it into the PEP
repository as PEP397. The reference implementation is currently being
tracked at http://bugs.python.org/issue11629.
Hey Mark,
One way of supporting alternative implementations (that may not even
have a standard install directory) is allowing configuration. e.g.
config.ini
[paths]
ironpython = c:\Program Files\IronPython 2.7\ipy.exe
ironpython2.7 = c:\Program Files\IronPython 2.7\ipy.exe
jython = c:\Users\foobar\jython2.5\jython.exe
Hi Michael,
I'd have no problem with that in general, but how would you feel about
letting the PEP stand as it is without this additional requirement and
then treat this as an additional feature to be thrashed out
separately? I intentionally worded the PEP to specifically allow
these kinds of features to be added outside the PEP process.
For example, I guess the name of the INI file wouldn't be config.ini,
and I guess there might need to be a strategy to allow it to exist in
multiple places for when users want this feature but don't have write
access to the location of py.exe. Then people might want it to be in
the cwd, or in any parent of the cwd, etc... Further, it might also be
possible to support this with simple environment variables which might
wind up being just as (or more) reasonable (the concept of per-user
environment variables already exist and a UI already exists for
editing them, and it would allow different cmd-prompts to have
different "rules" with minimal complexity) - not that I am necessarily
advocating this - I'd just prefer the PEP to not get bogged down with
those kinds of issues.
Well... I'd rather see the pep implemented as is than not implemented.
On the other hand I think it would be a great shame for it to be
implemented in a way that excludes-until-someone-else-fixes-it the other
implementations. (i.e. I think built-in support for other
implementations would be vastly preferable.) It's your PEP though, and
I'm still +1 on the idea.
I'm not married to it being a config file - registry entries would be
fine (implementations could modify their installers or ship scripts to
create the correct entries). I'm not sure about environment variables, I
suppose it would be ok - but modifying a single environment variable
with multiple paths / interpreters could get icky.
All the best,
Michael
Cheers,
Mark
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
_______________________________________________
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
