RetroSearch Browse

Wed Mar 29 00:58:58 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-March/062967.html

Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> On 3/28/06, Charles Cazabon <python at discworld.dyndns.org> wrote:
> > It might be worth instead adding an option flag to the executable that implies
> > "from the loaded module, run __main__() with sys.argv as its argument(s)", so
> > the user can get this behaviour with `python -X somemodule.py`.
> 
> You can do "python -m somemodule" as long as somemodule.py uses the if
> __name__=='__main__' convention. What does your proposal add?

Well, it's not really my proposal.  I'm just suggesting the behaviour in
PEP299 could be added via a commandline option so that it doesn't introduce
backward-incompatibility.  

I don't see any particular benefit to PEP299 myself -- I'd rather just add an
entry to the style guide about standardizing the "executable stanza" and main() function.

Charles
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon                           <python at discworld.dyndns.org>
GPL'ed software available at:               http://pyropus.ca/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-March/062967.html below:

[Python-Dev] What about PEP 299?