<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Sam Partington <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sam.partington@gmail.com">sam.partington@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">Yes it is a bit annoying to have to treat those specially, but other</div>
than -c/-m it does not need to understand pythons args, just check<br>
that the arg is not an explicit version specifier. -q/-Q etc have no<br>
impact on how to treat the file.<br>
<br>
In fact there's no real need to treat -c differently as it's extremely<br>
unlikely that there is a file that might match. But for -m you can<br>
come up with a situation where if you it gets it wrong. e.g. 'module'<br>
and 'module.py' in the cwd.<br>
<br>
I would suggest that it is also unlikely that there will be any future<br>
options would need any special consideration.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What about -S (no site.py) and -E (no environment)? These are needed for secure setuid scripts on *nix; I don't know how often they'd be used in practice on Windows. (Basically, they let you isolate a script's effective sys.path; there may be some use case overlap with virtual envs.</div>
<div><br></div></div>