RetroSearch Browse

Thu Mar 22 21:48:51 CET 2007 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-March/072279.html

Guido van Rossum schrieb:
> Sounds good to me. In 3.0 we should probably not have os.popen*(), nor
> the popen2 module at all, and do everything via the subprocess module.
> I wonder if we should even get rid of os.system(); then there should
> be a subprocess.system() instead. And do we even need os.fork(),
> os.exec*(), os.spawn*()?

I don't know about about *os*.fork; I surely like to have posix.fork. 
The posix module exposes many OS functions as-is. This has the
advantage that their semantics are crystal-clear: they do whatever the
system call does (which, ideally, is what POSIX specifies for it).
So you can do systems programming in Python, and only need good
knowledge of the underlying system calls (i.e. using Python as a
better C).

For the subsystem module, the semantics is not so clear, in border
cases.

Regards,
Martin

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-March/072279.html below:

[Python-Dev] deprecate commands.getstatus()