Message265931
Martin Panter:
> I think the basic idea of adding the warning is good.
Cool.
I pushed an enhanced version of my patch:
* I fixed _execute_child() to set correctly the returncode attribute
* I splitted the patch into multiple commits and I documented the doc
* I fixed test_subprocess on Windows
Me:
> TODO: fix also the Windows implementation of _execute_child().
subprocess.py on Windows is correct, but I had to fix more unit tests specific to Windows in test_subproces.py.
Martin Panter:
> One potential problem is how to provide for people who really want to let the child continue to run in the background or as a daemon without waiting for it, even if the parent exits. Perhaps a special method proc.detach() or whatever?
While I'm not convinced that the use case exists nor that it's safe to delegate the management of the subprocess to a different object after the Popen object is destroyed, I opened the issue #27068 to discuss this feature enhancement. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2016-05-20 10:49:12 | vstinner | set | recipients:
+ vstinner, pitrou, python-dev, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka |
2016-05-20 10:49:12 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1463741352.76.0.104476014407.issue26741@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2016-05-20 10:49:12 | vstinner | link | issue26741 messages |
2016-05-20 10:49:12 | vstinner | create | |
|