>> The globals set up for running the script appear not to contain a
>> '__file__' key, and have a '__name__' key explicitly set to None.
>> If it set either of these to something useful, or didn't have a
>> '__name__' key explicitly set to None, warning.warn() would have
>> been able to make up *something* for warn_explicit's filename and/or
>> module arguments.
> Argh. Scripts need a __name__ defined, or various activities choke.
> It can't be the Id of the Script, since that can contain '.', which
> screws up imports in the Script.
Since that's mondo obscure, let's point to your explanation:
That's especially worth reading because of Guido's profusely apologetic
response <wink -- "Too bad.">.
> It can't be None, since that will cause this problem.
> Are there hidden gotchas lurking around giving all Scripts the
> __name__ "Script (Python)"? Other suggestions?
I don't really know about Python Script, I've been talking about what
Python's warnings module does. Perhaps you could use the Id of the script
as __name__ after Id.replace('.', '-') (i.e., get rid of the dots)? Or it
*looks* like you could leave name None, but set '__file__' to something
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -