Thanks. That's just what I was looking for - a status update.On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Brett Cannon <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Tal Einat <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:01 PM, anatoly techtonik <email@example.com>
>> > Fixing this thing will make my happy (or very sad if you'd like this).
>> > Problem is described here:
>> > http://stackoverflow.com/a/6416333/239247
>> > Summary:
>> > 1. chdir()
>> > 2. dirname(__file__)
>> > 3. FAIL
>> > Proposal:
>> > from __future__ import abs__file__
>> Anatoly, this subject was already discussed on this list, just three
>> months ago, in a thread you started! _
>> To quote one of Nick Coglahan's replies _:
>> > Note that any remaining occurrences of non-absolute values in __file__
>> > are
>> > generally considered bugs in the import system. However, we tend not to
>> > fix
>> > them in maintenance releases, since converting relative paths to
>> > absolute
>> > paths runs a risk of breaking user code.
>> > We're definitely *not* going to further pollute the module namespace
>> > with
>> > values that can be trivially and reliably derived from existing values.
> This was also changed in Python 3.4 back in October:
Links in emails are not telling anything about progress being
made, roadmap, problems and versions of Python. Seem like
tracker is a poor tool to track this stuff too.
Now in spite of recent Python 3 status update, the question is how
possible to make this feature more visible and implemented in
previous version as from __future__ import abs__file__?
I'd like to ask for two perspectives:
1. technical feasibility
2. political obstacles (backward compatibility policy / process obstacles),
even if they are obvious
Also, what is the process of nominating this features to selection in
Python 2.8 (or whatever comes out of this incremental development idea)?