[Python-Dev] PEP 338 vs PEP 328 (original) (raw)
[Python-Dev] PEP 338 vs PEP 328 - a limitation of the -m switch
Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Sun Jun 18 23:49:48 CEST 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 338 vs PEP 328 - a limitation of the -m switch
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 338 vs PEP 328 - a limitation of the -m switch
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 6/18/06, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
>You have a point about sys.path[0] being special. It could be the >current directory instead of the package directory.
Mightn't that be a security risk, in that it introduces an import hole for secure scripts run with -m? Not that I know of any such scripts existing as yet...
That sounds like an invented use case if I ever heard of one. YAGNI, please!
If it's not the package directory, perhaps it could be a copy of whatever sys.path entry the package was found under - that wouldn't do anything but make "nearby" imports faster.
But it could theoretically affect search order for other modules. I still see nothing wrong with "". After all that's also the default if you run a script using python <path/to/file.py .
-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 338 vs PEP 328 - a limitation of the -m switch
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 338 vs PEP 328 - a limitation of the -m switch
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]