[Python-Dev] Computed Goto dispatch for Python 2
Steve.Dower at microsoft.com
Sun May 31 20:32:35 CEST 2015
"We are calling it 'embedable', but the rest of the world would call it
'portable', as in, runable from a usb stick"
I called it embeddable because it's not intended for direct use and is not complete. There's no test suite, no documentation, no tkinter (pending high demand), no pip, no site-packages, and no folder structure. It really is meant to be a component in another application that provides the rest of the layout for its own needs. (I probably ought to blog about it so there's at least one detailed example of what it's for...)
A nice side-effect is that you can make a regular per-user install portable by adding a pyvenv.cfg with "applocal = True", which disables regular path resolution (and also ignores PYTHONPATH, which is a feature or a bug, depending on your point of view). This only works on Windows right now, but could probably be ported from getpathp.c into getpath.c easily.
Top-posted from my Windows Phone
From: Alexander Walters<mailto:tritium-list at sdamon.com>
Sent: 5/31/2015 6:39
To: python-dev at python.org<mailto:python-dev at python.org>
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Computed Goto dispatch for Python 2
A better course of action would be to deprecate the non-portable
version. Other than setting the PATH envvar, why do we need to continue
even touching the system on install? It is highly annoying for those of
us that maintain several installs of python on a single windows system,
and it really should stop.
The only use I can think of for ever touching the registry in the first
place is to tell distutils installers where python is. I can tell you
right now, that design choice is a bug. There are some mighty hacks you
have to go through to correct that behavior when you happen to be using
(We are calling it 'embedable', but the rest of the world would call it
'portable', as in, runable from a usb stick)
On 5/31/2015 06:47, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 31 May 2015 at 11:41, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 31 May 2015 at 10:14, Xavier Combelle <xavier.combelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> +1. The new embeddable Python distribution for Windows is a great step
>>>> forward for this. It's not single-file, but it's easy to produce a
>>>> single-directory self-contained application with it. I don't know if
>>>> there's anything equivalent for Linux/OSX - maybe it's something we
>>>> should look at for them as well (although the whole "static binaries"
>>>> concept seems to be fairly frowned on in the Unix world, from what
>>>> I've seen).
>>> Just curious What is "the new embeddable Python distribution for Windows" ?
>> Python 3.5 ships a zipfile which contains a self-contained Python
>> installation, intended for embedding. The idea is that you unzip it
>> into your application directory, and use it from within your
>> application (either via the embedding API, or using the included
>> python.exe/pythonw.exe). It doesn't use the registry, or any global
>> resources, so it's independent of any installed python that might be
> By the way, IMO the new embeddable distribution is a pretty big deal
> on Windows. To make sure that it doesn't end up unnoticed, can I
> suggest we include a prominent "What's New" entry for it, and a
> section in "Python Setup and Usage" under "Using Python on Windows"
> for it?
> I'd hate to find that 3 or 4 versions from now, we're still trying to
> remind people that they can use the embeddable distribution, in the
> same way that executable zipfiles ended up an almost unknown feature
> for ages.
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/tritium-list%40sdamon.com
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-Dev