Author vstinner
Recipients Neil Muller, amaury.forgeotdarc, benjamin.peterson, cvrebert, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, gvanrossum, krawyoti, lemburg, r.david.murray, vstinner
Date 2011-05-30.15:52:31
SpamBayes Score 5.69412e-07
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <201105301752.26036.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com>
In-reply-to <1306770009.64.0.382546052911.issue6490@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> Victor: did you notice that getoutput and friends call os.popen?

Yes, because I wrote a patch to call directly subprocess :-) => see the issue 
#10197. I don't want to remove os.popen() anymore, it's too much work for a 
minor gain (we will remove it in Python 4). But we can add a note in its 
documentation saying that the subprocess should be prefered.

> But that is only true in general, and os.popen was never
> a "thin" wrapper, at least on most platforms.

os.popen() was a thin wrapper in Python 2.x: posix.popen() was a wrapper of 
the popen() C function.
History
Date User Action Args
2011-05-30 15:52:32vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, lemburg, gvanrossum, georg.brandl, amaury.forgeotdarc, benjamin.peterson, ezio.melotti, Neil Muller, eric.araujo, r.david.murray, cvrebert, krawyoti
2011-05-30 15:52:31vstinnerlinkissue6490 messages
2011-05-30 15:52:31vstinnercreate