> > I'm -0.5 myself, though, for the reason that it complicates the startup
> > process a little bit more, without looking very compelling. It smells
> > disturbingly like LD_PRELOAD to me.
> 
> Antoine, do you have a suggestion for how to solve the coverage.py
> problem?  To re-iterate: imagine you have a large test suite, and it
> spawns python processes during the tests.  Mercurial, for example, is
> like this.  You want to measure the coverage of your test suite.  This
> means not do you have to invoke the main suite with "python
> coverage.py run tests.py" instead of "python tests.py", but all the
> subprocess invocations need to invoke coverage.py as well.

Ok, sorry then, I retract what I said. I agree the use case is
legitimate.