[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset d2ad2e04dc9d by Benjamin Peterson in branch '3.4': merge 3.3 (#19060) http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/d2ad2e04dc9d -- ___ Python tracker _

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 1d31060f8a5c by Benjamin Peterson in branch '2.7': remove unnecessary word (closes #19060) http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1d31060f8a5c New changeset 4d8a9d12edfa by Benjamin Peterson in branch '3.3': remove unnecessary word (closes #19060) http://

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

R. David Murray added the comment: Terry: good point. popen did become undeprecated, however, its implementation was replaced by calls to subprocess. The reason it is kept is that it is an easy shorthand for various common operations...that is, it is a convenience function, even though it li

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Changes by Anastasia.Filatova : Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file34373/Issue19060_py27.patch ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Anastasia.Filatova added the comment: David, Terry, thank you for my patch review. I took into consideration your comments and corrected text for specified versions as you said. I decided don't change 'popen*' to 'popen[2-4]' to keep text in one format but the final decision is up to you. ---

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Changes by Anastasia.Filatova : Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file34372/Issue19060_py34.patch ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Terry J. Reedy added the comment: I agree with David about not adding the note. Simplify "This module intends to replace several other, older modules and functions, such as:" to "This module replaces several older modules and functions:". The 2.7 list has 'popen*', which would include 'popen',

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

R. David Murray added the comment: Anastasia, thanks for the patch, but the change being suggested here is adding the note about it not replace os.exec or os.fork. The listing of what things it does replace is already correct (it differs between python2 and python3, which is why Anatoly's lis

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Changes by R. David Murray : -- Removed message: http://bugs.python.org/msg213184 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

R. David Murray added the comment: Anastasia, thanks for the patch, but the change being suggested here is just the adding of the note that it does not replace os.exec or os.fork. The listing of what things it does replace is already correct (it differs between python2 and python3, which is w

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Anastasia.Filatova added the comment: Hello, I've made patch which address this issue. Could you please review it? -- keywords: +patch nosy: +Anastasia.Filatova Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file34362/Issue19060.patch ___ Python tracker

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Changes by Ezio Melotti : -- nosy: +ezio.melotti stage: -> needs patch type: -> enhancement ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-l

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

anatoly techtonik added the comment: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 10:30 PM, Terry J. Reedy wrote: > > If a sentence were added, I would simplify it to > "It does not replace os.exec*." or perhaps "os.fork and os.exec*.". I prefer list. It is easier to scan: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-users-

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

anatoly techtonik added the comment: I would like to know if the list is complete too. It would be extremely awesome if it was complete. This raises a side issue that there seems no guideline to write unambiguous and complete documentation. I spammed the tracker with this stuff in issue19121. -

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

Terry J. Reedy added the comment: The problem with the current text is 'such as', implying that there are other unlisted items that could have (should have?) been added to make the list complete. If the list is complete, 'such as' could just be removed. If a sentence were added, I would simpli

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

anatoly techtonik added the comment: tag:easy (meaning, please mark it as easy for OpenHatch robots) -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Pyt

[issue19060] docs: note that subprocess doesn't replace os.exec*

New submission from anatoly techtonik: I always thought that subprocess is replacing all other methods of executing external programs from Python and it is a preferred way. Perhaps I was not attentive that people isolate: os.system os.spawn* os.popen* and os.exec* While subprocess repl