I'm hesitant to suggest adding yet-another-option to any subprocess API, but I'm thinking it may be worth it in this case.

The idea is to make it possible to replace:

    result = subprocess.run(cmd, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE)

with:

    result = subprocess.run(cmd, capture_output=True)

That way, it would be possible for the raw stdin/stdout/stderr parameters to be treated as low level implementation details most of the time, since the most common configurations would be:

    # Use parent's stdin/stdout/stderr
    result = subprocess.run(cmd) 
    # Use pipe for stdin, use parent's stdout/stderr
    result = subprocess.run(cmd, input=data)
    # Use parent's stdin, use pipe for stdout/stderr
    result = subprocess.run(cmd, capture_output=True) 
    # Use pipe for stdin/stdout/stderr
    result = subprocess.run(cmd, input=data, capture_output=True)

Yeah, I find it pretty common to set both stdout and stderr to PIPE, but I'm with you in hesitating to add YAO to the subprocess API.  If you do move forward with this though, I think capture_output would have to be mutually exclusive to stdout and stderr.  You should not be allowed to provide either of the latter two if the former is given.

New changeset ce0f33d04528fcafc673a8707871f8430d8f7ce8 by Gregory P. Smith (Bo Bayles) in branch 'master':
bpo-32102 Add "capture_output=True" to subprocess.run (GH-5149)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/ce0f33d04528fcafc673a8707871f8430d8f7ce8

Thanks Bo.  I agree with Nick, this is a readability win for a common annoying to type otherwise case.