RetroSearch Browse

Fri Oct 8 20:16:20 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-October/049276.html

astrand at lysator.liu.se said:
> I've recieved very positive feedback on my module. Many users are also
> asking me if this module will be included in the standard library.
> That is, of course, my wish as well.
>
> So, can the subprocess module be accepted? If not, what needs to be
> done?

I've been watching the progression of subprocess with some interest. It
looks encouraging, and is exactly the sort of thing I need for my work.

One small nit I've noticed: aren't the names of subprocess.call() and
subprocess.callv() reversed? If you look at unix execl() and execv(),
execl() takes a variable-length argument list and execv() takes a list
(vector?) of arguments. But it's the opposite for subprocess -- callv()
takes a variable-length arg list and call() takes a list of args.

Am I missing something? Can these be renamed now before it gets
standardized?

Jason

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-October/049276.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: subprocess - updated popen5 module