There are two related problems that I'd like to fix for the release candidate. One is that compileall.py basically ignores compiler errors. It's clear that the code intends to return with a non-zero exit status if there are compilation errors, but it doesn't do that currently. If I fix just this problem, make install will start to fail because there are six files in the test directory that contain intentional SyntaxErrors; in one case, it's necessary that the SyntaxError be raised through import. I'd like to fix compileall.py and add an optional argument that tells it to skip files that match a regular expression. Then I'll rename all the offending files so that they are named badsyntax_XXX and fix the Makefile so that it installs them but does not compile them. This is going to cause two problems for developers. First, you'll need to manually delete the files with the old names from the install lib directory. (I'll rename nocaret.py to badsyntax_nocaret.py, but, if you've already done an install, you'll also have a nocaret.py in the lib directory.) The compileall script also traverses into site-packages. If you have compilation errors in code that you've installed into site-packages, then make install will fail. I'm not sure what to do about this. During development, at least, it is probably helpful for make install to walk into site-packages and fail if the new version of Python breaks existing code. On the other hand, it could be a big pain that you can't install Python just because you previously installed a buggy Python library. Of course, you could just remove the broken code. I think it's a net gain to make these changes. Is anyone more concerned that me about the possible breakage? Jeremy
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4