On Jan 19, 7:03 pm, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 08:30:12 -0800 (PST) > > jmfauth <wxjmfa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yes, I can launch a pyc, when I have a single file. > > But what happens, if one of your cached .pyc file import > > a module with a name as defined in the parent directory? > > The machinery is broken. The parent dir is not in the > > sys.path. > > Well, you don't have to launch a pyc file anyway. Put all your code in > some (pyc) modules on the standard Python path, and use a clear-text > script with some trivial code to invoke a function from the compiled > modules.
That's not the point. I'm toying. And the "behaviour" from now is deeply different from what it was. > Otherwise you can customize sys.path a little from your script, > using __file__ and os.path.dirname. Nothing complicated AFAICT. That's not as simple. You have too prepare the py file in such a way, that it recognizes the path of its ancestor py file. The "home dir" is no more the same. > (by the way, the fact that pyc files are version-specific should > discourage any use outside of version-specific directories, > e.g. /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages) Here we are. I'm just wondering if all this stuff is not just here in order to satisfy the missmatched Python installation on *x platforms compared to Windows whre each Python version lives cleanely in its isolated space. (Please no os war). jmf compared to -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
