On 5/03/2011 8:21 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: ... > As for Windows support: we currently don't install a python3.exe binary, > let alone python2.exe or pythonw2.exe (or is that python2w.exe?). I'll > adjust the installer if the PEP asks me to. For the reasons discussed, > I'm -0 on the change (i.e. double-clicking .py will continue to launch > the most-recently installed Python, rather than the "right" one, and > setting PYTHONPATH will continue to break installations). I agree with the -0 - I simply don't think it will, in practice, make anyone's life much easier. To run python2 and python3 based scripts in the same environment already requires some manual work by the machine owner (both directories will need to be added to the path) so the additional burden of some other steps (eg, .bat files, doskey alaises etc) doesn't seem that great. There is also a small risk of confusion - people may believe python.exe and python2.exe/python3.exe have different purposes and be confused about when to use which. I think this discussion should be divorced from this PEP and taken up with the discussion about the PATH and the "last installed wins" issue Martin mentions - only all of them taken together will "fix" this issue - not that I personally consider it particularly broken - more like "sub-optimal" :) Cheers, Mark
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