[issue1487] PEP 366 implementation

Nick Coghlan added the comment: Checked in as rev 59288. -- status: open -> closed __ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> __ ___ Python-bugs-list mailin

[issue1487] PEP 366 implementation

Guido van Rossum added the comment: Great, now check it in! On Dec 2, 2007 6:01 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nick Coghlan added the comment: > > Posted v2 of the patch, which fixes the problem Guido noted, and > improved the tests to make sure __package__ is being set correctl

[issue1487] PEP 366 implementation

Nick Coghlan added the comment: Posted v2 of the patch, which fixes the problem Guido noted, and improved the tests to make sure __package__ is being set correctly. There's also now an explicit test for using -m on a module inside a package (which proved harder to write than I expected - it isn't

[issue1487] PEP 366 implementation

Changes by Nick Coghlan: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file8794/pep_366_v1.diff __ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> __ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing li

[issue1487] PEP 366 implementation

Nick Coghlan added the comment: I forgot to update the special _run_module_as_main variant when I modified run_module. I'll modify the patch to fix that and to test '-m' explicitly in test_cmd_line_script. __ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[issue1487] PEP 366 implementation

Guido van Rossum added the comment: I think the implementation is fine too (others will have to check it more carefully) but I noticed that the promised functionality of -m doesn't work yet: I created a file Lib/test/foo.py whose sole contents was "from . import test_support". Then I tried to imp

[issue1487] PEP 366 implementation

Changes by Guido van Rossum: -- assignee: -> gvanrossum nosy: +gvanrossum __ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> __ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list

[issue1487] PEP 366 implementation

New submission from Nick Coghlan: Patch to implement PEP 366. Note that it doesn't implement precisely the semantics described in the version of the PEP posted in July, as some of those ideas didn't prove feasible due to the fact that imp.new_module can't tell the difference between normal modul