> Though ill timed, the -m idea is honking good. If it can be reliably > worked out in its simplest form (not trying to be all things to all > packages), it's worth going ahead for Py2.4. Command line guys like me > need this every day. His patch will address a continual source of > irritation and make the tool more pleasant to use. I was in fact thinking of the -m proposal when I wrote that... It's so easy to define an alias or use a one-line shell script for invoking Python with a full pathname that I'm really not sure I like the -m idea, and I worry that it would be done the wrong way because it's so close to beta. Half the time the problem is getting the path set in the first place, and there -m doesn't help you. Supporting it with packages seems insanity. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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