Re: Python package providing both modules and an app
On Jun 22, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
>This seems to be more common now that command-line invocation is
>becoming even more discouraged. When the upstream documentation
>recommends ‘python3 -m foo.bar’ as the primary means of invoking the
>command line functionality, that really blurs the line between
>command-line application versus library.
Indeed. It's true that -m invocation isn't as pretty as a /usr/bin script,
but it does have the advantage of unambiguously choosing the Python version
you want to run the script with. How important that is depends on the
application of course.
>There is a compounding tendency to disparage ‘python3 ./foo/bar.py’,
>which is subject to weird hacks and incomplete workarounds like
><URL:https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0366/>. I wish this trend could
>be effectively reversed, because IMO this is a serious impediment to
>considering Python a good choice for command-line scripting. But this is
>all a digression, my apologies.
Sorry, I don't quite understand the above. Do you mean that you would rather
use `python3 ./foo/bar.py` more often and `python3 -m foo.bar` less often?
In any case, thanks Hugo for choosing Python 3 as the version to use for the
/usr/bin script. :)
Cheers,
-Barry
Reply to: