RetroSearch Browse

Wed Feb 25 11:00:58 CET 2015 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-February/138556.html

On 24 February 2015 at 18:58, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> The naming of the functions feels inconsistent -- maybe pack(directory,
> target) -> create_archive(directory, archive), and set_interpreter() ->
> copy_archive(archive, new_archive)?

One possible source of confusion with copy_archive (and its command
line equivalent "python -m zipapp old.pyz -o new.pyz") is that it
isn't technically a copy, as it changes the shebang line (if you omit
the interpreter argument it removes the existing shebang). We could
change it to copy by default, but (a) that's redundant as a file copy
works better, and (b) we'd need to add a method of specifying "remove
the shebang" to replace omitting the interpreter arg.

Is this a big enough issue to be worth changing the name of the
function and the command line behaviour? I'm inclined to leave it, but
mainly on the basis that I feel like I'm getting to the point of
over-thinking things...

Paul

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-February/138556.html below:

[Python-Dev] Request for Pronouncement: PEP 441