> """Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.""" > > People expect -E to disable envvar-driven overrides, so just treat it > like that and don't try to second-guess the user.
And of course "Although practicality beats purity.” :) So while I agree that the consistency argument makes sense, does it make the most practical sense? I’m not sure. On the PR, Nick suggests even another option: treat -E as all other environment variables, but then -I would be PYTHONBREAKPOINT=0. Since the documentation for -I says "(implies -E and -s)” that seems even more special-case-y to me. "In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.” I’m really not sure what the right answer is, including to *not* make PYTHONBREAKPOINT obey -E. Unfortunately we probably won’t really get a good answer in practice until Python 3.7 is released, so maybe I just choose one and document that the behavior of PYTHONBREAKPOINT under -E is provision for now. If that’s acceptable, then I would just treat -E for PYTHONBREAKPOINT the same as all other environment variables, and we’ll see how it goes. Cheers, -Barry
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
