[Python-Dev] towards a stricter definition of sys.executable
"Martin v. Löwis"
martin at v.loewis.de
Fri Mar 17 09:40:31 CET 2006
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Fri Mar 17 09:40:31 CET 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] towards a stricter definition of sys.executable
- Next message: [Python-Dev] towards a stricter definition of sys.executable
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Fredrik Lundh wrote: > I don't think many people embed setup.py scripts, so alternative (e) would pro- > bably cause the least problems: > > e) sys.executable contains the full path to the program used to invoke > this interpreter instance, or None if this could not be determined. It seems that you indeed are trying to solve a problem you encountered. Can you please explain what the problem is? ISTM that the current definition doesn't really cause problems, despite potentially being fuzzy. People that start sys.executable typically *do* get a Python interpreter - in an embedded interpreter, they just don't want to start a new interpreter, as that couldn't work, anyway. Regards, Martin
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] towards a stricter definition of sys.executable
- Next message: [Python-Dev] towards a stricter definition of sys.executable
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list