This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author takluyver
Recipients docs@python, gregory.p.smith, ncoghlan, takluyver
Date 2016-05-18.08:08:41
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1463558921.57.0.714348440551.issue27050@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I'm obviously biased, but I find the 'high level convenience API' less convenient than the run() function: there are three different functions for the same basic operation, they're not clearly named (check_output is nothing to do with checking output), and there are things that should be simple but they can only do awkwardly (i.e. capturing both output and the exit code).

Once I can depend on Python >= 3.5, I hope to never use call/check_call/check_output again. Using run() might make code slightly longer, but I think it also makes it clearer. I accept that the trio can probably never be removed, but this is why I demoted them a long way down the docs.

Unfortunately I won't be at PyCon this year to discuss this.
History
Date User Action Args
2016-05-18 08:08:41takluyversetrecipients: + takluyver, gregory.p.smith, ncoghlan, docs@python
2016-05-18 08:08:41takluyversetmessageid: <1463558921.57.0.714348440551.issue27050@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-05-18 08:08:41takluyverlinkissue27050 messages
2016-05-18 08:08:41takluyvercreate