Guido van Rossum wrote: > On 3/22/07, Jon Ribbens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> "\"Martin v. Löwis\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>> And do we even need os.fork(), os.exec*(), os.spawn*()? >>>> >>> I don't know about about *os*.fork; I surely like to have posix.fork. >>> The posix module exposes many OS functions as-is. This has the >>> advantage that their semantics are crystal-clear: they do whatever the >>> system call does (which, ideally, is what POSIX specifies for it). >>> So you can do systems programming in Python, and only need good >>> knowledge of the underlying system calls (i.e. using Python as a >>> better C). >>> >> I definitely agree. Removing the POSIX system call mappings would make >> Python less useful and general-purpose. >> >> Yes it's nice to have high-level utility functions like those in the >> subprocess module, but I think it's very important for the low-level >> functions to be there too when you need them. >> > > Sure. os.fork() and the os.exec*() family can stay. But os.spawn*(), > that abomination invented by Microsoft? I also hear no opposition > against killign os.system() and os.popen()
Except that 'os.system' is really easy to use and I use it rarely enough that I *always* have to RTFM for subprocess which makes you jump through a few more (albeit simple) hoops. Additionally, AFAIK subprocess is still broken for py2exe'd applications which is a problem. All the best, Michael Foord _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
