RetroSearch Browse

Mon Mar 21 02:27:58 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/109629.html

>> I remain -1 on any proposal that uses subprocesses. It absolutely must
>> be the launcher that is running Python. In fact, I'd call it
>> "python.exe".
> 
> For clarity, could you please tell us which scenarios you have in mind
> that cause you to take that position, and why those scenarios couldn't
> ignore the existence of the launcher and stick with doing exactly what
> they do now (which presumably is to use python.exe directly)?

I'm primarily bothered about the failure to implement TerminateProcess
correctly. I don't actually know what use cases would be affected, other
then saying that anything launching py.exe could be affect, in
particular applications using ShellExecuteEx. I don't think it is
feasible to change them all to launch something different instead; some
may be out of our control. Potential candidates would be web servers.

Regards,
Martin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/109629.html below:

[Python-Dev] Draft PEP and reference implementation of a Python launcher for Windows