Terry Reedy wrote: > On 10/26/2015 9:55 AM, Peter Otten wrote: > >> The "bug" or misfeature is that idle automatically adds the working >> directory to sys.path. > > I am not sure what you mean by 'working directory' here.
After $ cd /foo/bar the working directory is /foo/bar > When one runs a > program with 'python somepath/file.py', python prepends somepath to > sys.path. If /foo/bar contains a string.py (for example) module and you run the following sequence $ cd /foo/bar $ python3 /usr/bin/idle3 /foo/bar/string.py will shade string.py from the standard library. The relevant code in idle is https://hg.python.org/cpython/file/tip/Lib/idlelib/PyShell.py#l1522 """ else: dir = os.getcwd() if dir not in sys.path: sys.path.insert(0, dir) """ I think this is a misfeature. >> Ideally the editor should see the unaltered path > > I don't know what you mean here. The editor does not look as sys.path. idle should see the sys.path as it was before inserting os.getcwd(). >> while scripts started from within idle might be allowed to import from >> the working directory. > > Programs run from the editor are intended to run as much as possible the > same as if run from a command line. To do this, IDLE must prepend > somepath to sys.path the same as python itself does. As a result, if > somepath/file.py contains > > import sys > print(sys.path) > > then when run, sys.path starts with os.abspath(somepath). Yes, if inside the shell shown by idle the user types >>> import string this should import /foo/bar/string.py rather than the stdlib version. Different behaviour for "idle the editor" and "idle the shell" is of course only possible if both use distinct processes. I don't know idle's architecture, so I cannot say if that's already the case or if it would require a major rewrite. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
