Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-10 Thread Michael Foord
Brett Cannon wrote: On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:31, Michael Foord mailto:fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk>> wrote: Brett Cannon wrote: On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:32, Michael Foord mailto:fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk>

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-10 Thread Kevin Teague
On Oct 10, 2009, at 2:17 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: The one unfortunate thing about this proposal is how this is going to mean I have to install a package potentially four times if I want it available to all possible Python interpreters. Then again, the chances of anyone beyond the people on

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-10 Thread Brett Cannon
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:31, Michael Foord wrote: > Brett Cannon wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:32, Michael Foord >> > fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk>> wrote: >> >>The *only* change in semantics I'm proposing is for users of >>IronPython 2.6 which is not even at final release ye

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-10 Thread Dino Viehland
Michael wrote: > The IronPython team currently have legal issues distributing modified > versions of the standard library (Dino can correct me if I'm wrong > here). It's actually not due to legal issues although we'd have to check w/ the lawyers if we wanted to do it. It's mainly that we don't w

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-10 Thread Michael Foord
Brett Cannon wrote: On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:32, Michael Foord > wrote: The *only* change in semantics I'm proposing is for users of IronPython 2.6 which is not even at final release yet. CPython users would be unaffected. Then why can't IronPy

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Frank Wierzbicki
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Christian Heimes wrote: > CPython: >  ~/.local/lib/python2.6/site-packages >  %APPDATA%/Python/Python26 > > IronPython: >  ~/.local/lib/ironpython2.6/site-packages >  %APPDATA%/Python/IronPython26 > > Jython: >  ~/.local/lib/jython2.6/site-packages >  %APPDATA%/Pyth

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Brett Cannon
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:32, Michael Foord wrote: > The *only* change in semantics I'm proposing is for users of IronPython 2.6 > which is not even at final release yet. CPython users would be unaffected. > > Then why can't IronPython patch site.py to do what they want? I still feel uncomfortable

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Michael Foord
The *only* change in semantics I'm proposing is for users of IronPython 2.6 which is not even at final release yet. CPython users would be unaffected. Sorry for top-posting, mobile device. Michael -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com On 9 Oct 2009, at 19:00, Brett Cannon wrote: On Fr

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Brett Cannon
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 04:53, Michael Foord wrote: > Christian Heimes wrote: > >> Michael Foord wrote: >> >> >>> I really like this scheme. The important thing for IronPython is that we >>> can get it into Python 2.6 (along with other fixes to make distutils >>> compatible with IronPython - like n

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Michael Foord
M.-A. Lemburg wrote: Christian Heimes wrote: Nick Coghlan wrote: Importing yet-another-module for use in site.py doesn't sound like a great idea, so it may make sense to migrate that information into the sys module is this approach is taken. "sys.name" is a little generic though - somet

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Michael Foord
Christian Heimes wrote: Michael Foord wrote: I really like this scheme. The important thing for IronPython is that we can get it into Python 2.6 (along with other fixes to make distutils compatible with IronPython - like not attempting to bytecode-compile when sys.dont_write_bytecode is Tru

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread M.-A. Lemburg
Christian Heimes wrote: > Nick Coghlan wrote: >> Importing yet-another-module for use in site.py doesn't sound like a >> great idea, so it may make sense to migrate that information into the >> sys module is this approach is taken. "sys.name" is a little generic >> though - something more explicit

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Christian Heimes
Michael Foord wrote: > I really like this scheme. The important thing for IronPython is that we > can get it into Python 2.6 (along with other fixes to make distutils > compatible with IronPython - like not attempting to bytecode-compile > when sys.dont_write_bytecode is True). I don't think my

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Christian Heimes
Antoine Pitrou wrote: > `usersitesuffix` should probably be a separate sys attribute, since it doesn't > depend on the VM only, but also on the platform and version. I don't really care and I'm happy to follow the herd in this matter. :) Christian ___

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Christian Heimes
Tarek Ziadé wrote: > I have a suggestion though, that completes Nick's answer. > > distutils/command/install.py already contains install schemes and > imports USER_SITE and USER_BASE to builds user-specific install > schemes. I think it wouldn't hurt for clarity to reunite all these > schemes in a

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Christian Heimes cheimes.de> writes: > > >>> sys.vm > sys.vm(id='cpython', name='CPython', platform='C', > usersitesuffix='python26') # on win32: Python2.6 > > >>> sys.vm > sys.vm(id='ironpython', name='IronPython', platform='.NET', > usersitesuffix='ironpython26) # on win32: IronPython2.6 `use

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-09 Thread Christian Heimes
Nick Coghlan wrote: > Christian Heimes wrote: >> The solution requires a new attribute in the sys module that contains >> the name of the implementation. As an alternative we could use the first >> field of sys.subversion but I prefer an explicit attribute. I'm >> proposing "sys.name" with a value

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-08 Thread Michael Foord
Christian Heimes wrote: [snip...] The altered user site directories are: CPython: ~/.local/lib/python2.6/site-packages %APPDATA%/Python/Python26 IronPython: ~/.local/lib/ironpython2.6/site-packages %APPDATA%/Python/IronPython26 Jython: ~/.local/lib/jython2.6/site-packages %APPDATA%

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-08 Thread Benjamin Peterson
2009/10/8 Nick Coghlan : > As mentioned in that discussion, as of Python 2.6, you can do the following: import platform platform.python_implementation() > 'CPython' > > (Although according to the function docstring, PyPy is currently missing > from the list of known implementations) That

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-08 Thread Tarek Ziadé
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Christian Heimes wrote: [...] > The altered user site directories are: > > CPython: >  ~/.local/lib/python2.6/site-packages >  %APPDATA%/Python/Python26 > > IronPython: >  ~/.local/lib/ironpython2.6/site-packages >  %APPDATA%/Python/IronPython26 > > Jython: >  ~/.lo

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-08 Thread Nick Coghlan
Christian Heimes wrote: > The solution requires a new attribute in the sys module that contains > the name of the implementation. As an alternative we could use the first > field of sys.subversion but I prefer an explicit attribute. I'm > proposing "sys.name" with a value of "CPython", "IronPython"

[Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

2009-10-08 Thread Christian Heimes
Dear Pythonistas! Michael Foord has written a blog posting [1] regarding IronPython, site packages and my PEP 370. I'm referring to the section that talks about an issue with PEP 370. --- If you install CPython 2.6 on Windows it creates a folder in the location: %APPDATA%\Python\Python26\site-pac