I finally finished updating PEP 338 to comply with the flexible importing
system in PEP 302.
The result is a not-yet-thoroughly-tested module that should allow the -m
switch to execute any module written in Python that is accessible via an
absolute import statement.
The PEP now uses runpy for
Nick Coghlan wrote:
The PEP now uses runpy for the module name, and run_module for the function
used to locate and execute scripts. There's probably some discussion to be
had
in relation to the Design Decisions section of the PEP, relating to the way I
wrote the module (the handling of
On 2/11/06, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I finally finished updating PEP 338 to comply with the flexible importing
system in PEP 302.
The result is a not-yet-thoroughly-tested module that should allow the -m
switch to execute any module written in Python that is accessible via an
Paul Moore wrote:
On 2/11/06, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I finally finished updating PEP 338 to comply with the flexible importing
system in PEP 302.
The result is a not-yet-thoroughly-tested module that should allow the -m
switch to execute any module written in Python that is
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Paul Moore wrote:
On 2/11/06, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I finally finished updating PEP 338 to comply with the flexible importing
system in PEP 302.
The result is a not-yet-thoroughly-tested module that should allow the -m
switch to execute any module written
Paul Moore wrote:
On 2/11/06, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I finally finished updating PEP 338 to comply with the flexible importing
system in PEP 302.
The result is a not-yet-thoroughly-tested module that should allow the -m
switch to execute any module written in Python that is
Paul Moore wrote:
On 2/11/06, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I finally finished updating PEP 338 to comply with the flexible importing
system in PEP 302.
The result is a not-yet-thoroughly-tested module that should allow the -m
switch to execute any module written in Python that is
