> Tim Peters wrote: > > > > Mike has a darned good point here. Anyone have a darned good answer <wink>? > > Subject: Fixing os.popen on Win32 => is the win32pipe stuff going to be > > adopted? > > > > Just reading one more post (and a FAQ) on the win32 pipe breakage (sewage > > all over the hard-disk, traffic rerouted through the bit-bucket, you aren't > > getting to work anytime soon Mrs. Programmer) and wondering why we have a > > FAQ instead of having the win32pipe stuff rolled into the os module to fix > > it. Is there some incompatibility? Is there a licensing problem? MAL: > I'd suggest moving the popen from the C modules into os.py > as Python API and then applying all necessary magic to either > use the win32pipe implementation (if available) or the native > C one from the posix module in os.py. > > Unless, of course, the win32 stuff (or some of it) makes it into > the core. No concrete plans -- except that I think the registry access is supposed to go in. Haven't seen the code on patches@python.org yet though. > I'm mostly interested in this for my platform.py module... > BTW, is there any interest of moving it into the core ? "it" == platform.py? Little interest from me personally; I suppose it could go in Tools/scripts/... --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4