RetroSearch Browse

Mon Mar 7 21:49:59 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/108925.html

On 7 March 2011 20:33, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk> wrote:
> So why not do both? We could create the extra binaries to bring Python on
> Windows inline with the unix conventions for command line invocations, and
> the new launcher can follow on as a nice addition.

I was assuming that the exes in the installation directories would
include version-specific ones (bringing Windows in line with Unix
behaviour) and the python.exe launcher would be in system32 (making
python foo.py work on the command line) and would redirect to the
"default" python for the box (or a specific one, if -2, -3, -2.7 or
whatever flags were specified).

The launcher could also (as per Mark's suggestion) interpret a shebang
line in the script, so that scripts could specify their required
version without needing a different command,or multiple
version-specific extensions.

So yes, let's do both. That's certainly what I expected.
Paul.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/108925.html below:

[Python-Dev] [PEPs] Support the /usr/bin/python2 symlink upstream