Marc-Andre Lemburg added the comment: On 11.06.2014 13:22, Vinay Sajip wrote: > > Vinay Sajip added the comment: > >> Please also add some comment explaining why this is done in this way. > > Natürlich :-)
Prima :-) >> it may be worthwhile introducing some generic helper to the stdlib > > Wouldn't you have to pass in a function (or code object) from a specific > module, though? It seems more logical to have __file__ set, even for frozen > modules (after all, if it's there in a code object's co_filename, is there > some reason it shouldn't be exposed as a module attribute? (Even though it > isn't at the moment.) Well, I guess passing in a reference to the module would suffice. The function could then look around for functions, methods, etc. to find a usable code object. I agree that having a __file__ attribute in frozen modules would be helpful, since it's obviously not widely known that this attribute does not always exist (just grep the stdlib as example, in particular the test suite). The module object's PyModule_GetFilenameObject() even reports a missing __file__ attribute as a SystemError. Perhaps something to discuss on python-dev. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue21709> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
