Message90572
I am guessing the reason to keep os.popen() (albeit now reimplemented
using subprocess) is that it is a convenient wrapper for a common use case
and also familiar. I see no problem with this. (Indeed the big problem
was with the proliferation of popenN with confusing signatures.) So I
guess it ought to be documented and removed from the list of deprecations
in 2.6. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2009-07-16 14:48:34 | gvanrossum | set | recipients:
+ gvanrossum, georg.brandl, benjamin.peterson, krawyoti |
2009-07-16 14:48:34 | gvanrossum | set | messageid: <1247755714.13.0.534066936535.issue6490@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2009-07-16 14:48:32 | gvanrossum | link | issue6490 messages |
2009-07-16 14:48:32 | gvanrossum | create | |
|