On Mar 17, 2011, at 05:33 PM, Carl Meyer wrote:
On 03/17/2011 05:13 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
I suggest the following:
Look for argv[0]+'.pythonv' and then for '../pythonv.cfg'.
So if I've linked the Python executable to ./bin/clean, look for ./bin/clean.pythonv and ./pythonv.cfg.
Nice - I like the ability to have multiple interpreters side-by-side with different pythonv configurations.
Indeed. In that case though, wouldn't ./bin/clean.cfg be fine? Even if the executable were named ./bin/python a sibling ./bin/python.cfg would be fine too I think. I agree with Carl that I dislike the inconsistency in the extension, but I think argv[0] + '.cfg' would be fine.
Having a non-.cfg or -.conf extension makes it harder to do stuff like automatically set the major mode in Emacs (although I guess it wouldn't be that hard to add a mapping for *.pythonv).
Is ".cfg" generally preferred to ".conf" for some good reason? I don't personally care too much; the former is shorter but the latter looks less ugly to me ;-)
I guess I'm on the .cfg side, but wouldn't care too much if .conf is the consensus.
And I kind of dislike the inconsistency in extension; would "clean.pythonv.cfg" be acceptable?
I'm not sure you need the .pythonv. part.
To simplify documentation and allow more flexibility, I might just check for all four: first the executable-specific one in both directories, then the general one in both directories.
Definitely add a --verbose option to print out exactly which one got chosen. :)
-Barry