This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [Ping Python maintainer]: enhancement request
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 03:15:52PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>On 01 May 2007 14:59, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>Because python is a command interpreter,
>>Similarly, sh.exe
>
>I think these are two very strong arguments in favour.
python.exe isn't anything like the interactive shell that people use on
a day to day basis and simply stating that it is doesn't mean that it is.
The only reason that I can see for making a copy would be to support the
use of python in a .bat file. Otherwise you could always just do
python<TAB> from the command line.
>I note that we already (appear to?) do the same for perl.
Ok. I agree that is an argument in favor since I don't recall many complaints
about perl. It is a simple copy though, AFAICT. I've registered my objections
now and I'll leave the decision to the maintainer.
>(/me remembers back to the insane gyrations I had to go through a
>couple of years ago when I had to setup makefiles for my clients who
>wanted to invoke them from cmd.exe using --win32 and have them work on
>systems that could have either cygwin python or active python or both
>and they could come in any order in the path.... <shudder>)
This isn't really relevant to the discussion since the cygwin version of
make wouldn't have any problem with symlinks.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/