[issue22442] Deprecate PIPE with subprocess.check_call() and call()

[Irit Katriel]

Change by Irit Katriel :


--
resolution:  -> out of date
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: pending -> closed

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue22442] Deprecate PIPE with subprocess.check_call() and call()

[Irit Katriel]

Irit Katriel  added the comment:

Any objections to closing this?

If the old API is going to be deprecated I think that's a topic for another 
issue.

--
nosy: +iritkatriel
status: open -> pending

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue22442] Deprecate PIPE with subprocess.check_call() and call()

[Berker Peksag]

Changes by Berker Peksag :


--
nosy: +berker.peksag
stage: needs patch -> patch review
versions: +Python 3.6 -Python 3.5

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue22442] Deprecate PIPE with subprocess.check_call() and call()

[Akira Li]

Akira Li added the comment:

Martin, thank you for the review. As Matthias mentioned, the introduction of 
subprocess.run() perhaps deprecates this issue: old api should be left  alone 
to avoid breaking old code, new code should use new api, those who need old api 
(e.g., to write 2/3 compatible code) are expected to read the docs that already 
contain necessary warnings).

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue22442] Deprecate PIPE with subprocess.check_call() and call()

[Matthias Bussonnier]

Matthias Bussonnier added the comment:

3.5 have `subprocess.run`[1] that is much saner to use, and what you want to 
use in most cases. `call` and `check_call` docs even mention run.

[1]: https://docs.python.org/3.5/library/subprocess.html#subprocess.run

--
nosy: +mbussonn

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue22442] Deprecate PIPE with subprocess.check_call() and call()

[Martin Panter]

Martin Panter added the comment:

I agree with the deprecation idea. The parameter checking logic doesn’t seem 
right though; see Reitveld. Also, I would have made the warning specify exactly 
what is deprecated, in case the stack trace doesn’t identify the function, 
which I think would always happen with check_call(). Also be less specific 
about future changes, unless there is clear consensus to make this change in 
3.6. Maybe something like:

"Passing PIPE to call() and check_call() is deprecated; use DEVNULL instead to 
discard output or provide empty input"

Since 3.5 is now in the beta phase, would adding this deprecation be allowed, 
or should it be deferred to the 3.6 branch? Also, I’m not sure what the policy 
is for Python 2. Maybe it would be acceptable as a Python 3 compatibility 
warning, triggered by the “python2 -3” option; I dunno.

--
components:  -Windows
nosy: +vadmium
stage:  -> needs patch
title: subprocess.check_call hangs on large PIPEd data. -> Deprecate PIPE with 
subprocess.check_call() and call()

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com