On 07/26/2013 10:14 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 2:53 PM, MRAB wrote:
If you want to test what would happen if that version wasn't installed,
set the shebang line to a future version, such as Python 3.4. I doubt
you have that installed! :-)
Be careful, some people DO have
Tim Golden writes:
> Devyn, I'm not a *nix person so someone can point out if I'm wrong,
> but my understanding is that the shebang line (or whatever you want to
> call it) just tells the shell: run this command to run this file. So
> you can put "#!/usr/bin/fish-and-chips" as the first line and
Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
> Thanks Matthew Lefavor! But specifically, why use "#!/usr/bin/env python3"
> instead of
> "#!/usr/bin/python3"?
>
> Mahalo,
>
> DCJ
I believe this will work on Windows for Python 3.3+ and also with virtualenv.
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/virtualenv
Virtualenv i
>
>
> Thanks Matthew Lefavor! But specifically, why use "#!/usr/bin/env python3"
> instead of "#!/usr/bin/python3"?
>
The "env" program looks up its argument in the current $PATH environment
variable, and then executes that. This means you aren't necessarily tied to
/usr/bin/python3. It makes thin
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 2:53 PM, MRAB wrote:
> If you want to test what would happen if that version wasn't installed,
> set the shebang line to a future version, such as Python 3.4. I doubt
> you have that installed! :-)
Be careful, some people DO have a python3.4 binary :) Go for 3.5 for a
bit
On 26/07/2013 11:43, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Devyn Collier Johnson
wrote:
On 07/25/2013 09:54 AM, MRAB wrote:
On 25/07/2013 14:42, Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
If I execute a Python3 script with this haspling (#!/usr/bin/python3.3)
and Python3.3 is not insta
On 26/07/2013 11:37, Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
>
> On 07/25/2013 09:54 AM, MRAB wrote:
>> On 25/07/2013 14:42, Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
>>> If I execute a Python3 script with this haspling (#!/usr/bin/python3.3)
>>> and Python3.3 is not installed, but Python3.2 is installed, would the
>>> s
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Devyn Collier Johnson
wrote:
>
> On 07/25/2013 09:54 AM, MRAB wrote:
>>
>> On 25/07/2013 14:42, Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>> If I execute a Python3 script with this haspling (#!/usr/bin/python3.3)
>>> and Python3.3 is not installed, but Python3.2 is instal
On 07/25/2013 10:01 AM, Matthew Lefavor wrote:
The answer is "probably not." If you just want to use the latest
version of Python 3 you have installed on your system, use:
"#!/usr/bin/python3". When you use the specific minor version numbers,
they point to that specific minor version.
Actual
On 07/25/2013 09:54 AM, MRAB wrote:
On 25/07/2013 14:42, Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
If I execute a Python3 script with this haspling (#!/usr/bin/python3.3)
and Python3.3 is not installed, but Python3.2 is installed, would the
script still work? Would it fall back to Python3.2?
Why don't you
The answer is "probably not." If you just want to use the latest version of
Python 3 you have installed on your system, use: "#!/usr/bin/python3". When
you use the specific minor version numbers, they point to that specific
minor version.
Actually, the preferred shebang line is of the form: "#!/us
On 25/07/2013 14:42, Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
If I execute a Python3 script with this haspling (#!/usr/bin/python3.3)
and Python3.3 is not installed, but Python3.2 is installed, would the
script still work? Would it fall back to Python3.2?
Why don't you try it?
I hope Dihedral is listenin
If I execute a Python3 script with this haspling (#!/usr/bin/python3.3)
and Python3.3 is not installed, but Python3.2 is installed, would the
script still work? Would it fall back to Python3.2?
I hope Dihedral is listening. I would like to see another response from HIM.
Mahalo,
DCJ
--
http://
13 matches
Mail list logo
