[Guido] > > I don't know. Writing Windows interface modules is a highly > > specialized form of torture, requiring arcane expertise. [Fredrik] > Despite that, some of us can do this in our sleep (including writing the bindings). > I find it somewhat sad that some people don't want us to contribute to Python. Hey, I wrote that in *support* of you! > While we have you on line, can you pronounce on the subprocess module? The > code is written by highly experienced programmers, it has been widely tested, > it's entirely self-contained, builds and runs under 2.2 and later, has an extensive > test suite and a PEP (which can be quickly turned into a library reference section), > and replaces several fragile API:s in the current library with a single, well-defined > construct. If this isn't good enough for the standard library, I don't see what is. I expect it is, and I value your judgement. I have recently experimented with a cross-platform process management abstraction myself, and I'd like to check out the subprocess module to make sure that it can do everything that I put in my own code (not very much but some specific requirements about I/O redirection, current directory, and setting the priority. I hope to get back to this later today. -- --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