I'm planning to change the signature for subprocess.call slightly: -def call(*args, **kwargs): +def call(*popenargs, **kwargs): The purpose is to make it clearer that "args" in this context is not the same as the "args" argument to the Popen constructor. Two questions: 1) Is it OK to commit changes like this on the 2.4 branch, in addition to trunk? 2) Anyone that thinks that "kwargs" should be changed into "popenkwargs"? /Peter Åstrand <astrand@lysator.liu.se>
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Peter Åstrand wrote:
1) Is it OK to commit changes like this on the 2.4 branch, in addition to trunk?
I'm also wondering if patch 1071755 and 1071764 should go into release24-maint: * 1071755 makes subprocess raise TypeError if Popen is called with a bufsize that is not an integer. * 1071764 adds a new, small utility function. /Peter Åstrand <astrand@lysator.liu.se>
On Wednesday 01 December 2004 09:00, Peter Astrand wrote:
I'm also wondering if patch 1071755 and 1071764 should go into release24-maint:
* 1071755 makes subprocess raise TypeError if Popen is called with a bufsize that is not an integer.
Since this isn't changing anything that's user facing (just making the error handling more explicit) this is suitable for the maint branch.
* 1071764 adds a new, small utility function.
Please read PEP 6. Maintenance branches are not the place for new features. For an example why, consult almost any code that requires Python 2.2 or later. Chances are you'll find, all over the place, code like: try: True, False except NameError: True, False = 1, 0
participants (3)
-
Anthony Baxter -
Peter Astrand -
Peter Åstrand