For PEP 553, I think it’s a good idea to support the environment variable $PYTHONBREAKPOINT[*] but I’m stuck on a design question, so I’d like to get some feedback.
Should $PYTHONBREAKPOINT be consulted in breakpoint() or in sys.breakpointhook()? If we support it in breakpoint() then it means if $PYTHONBREAKPOINT is set, Python will never call sys.breakpointhook() so programmatic override of that will be ignored. If we support it in sys.breakpointhook(), then if you programmatically override that, $PYTHONBREAKPOINT will be ignored even if set. Of course, any code that overrides sys.breakpointhook() could also consult $PYTHONBREAKPOINT if they want. So how do we want it to work? It seems like explicit code should override the environment variable, which should override the default, meaning that $PYTHONBREAKPOINT should be consulted only in breakpoint(). And if you set sys.breakpointhook() with something else, then oh well, Python just ignores $PYTHONBREAKPOINT. Feedback welcome. -Barry [*] Probably not $PYTHONBREAKPOINTHOOK although if we choose to implement that in sys.breakpointhook(), it might still makes sense.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
