Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > 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. Ok, what about the optional "use win32pipe if available" idea then ? > > 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? Right. > Little interest from me personally; I suppose it > could go in Tools/scripts/... Hmm, it wouldn't help much in there I guess... after all, it defines APIs which are to be queried by other scripts. The default action to print the platform information to stdout is just a useful addition. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Business: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
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