On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:23:47 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 12:20:18AM -0400, Miles wrote:
The subprocess module is also supposed to replace os.system and
os.spawn*, neither of which involve opening pipes.
Uh... it's a replacement for os.popen(), which -- guess what --
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 12:20:18AM -0400, Miles wrote:
Derek Martin wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 10:55:54PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
but the instances of `Popen` are no actions. There's no way to
execute a `Popen` instance.
Yes there is... you execute it when you
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:54:12 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
And if they model an action there must be some way to activate the
action
That's a reasonable assumption, but as I also said, the object might
just describe the action -- essentially the equivalent of a struct in C.
``struct``\s in C
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 06:40:10AM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:54:12 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
And if they model an action there must be some way to activate the
action
That's a reasonable assumption, but as I also said, the object might
just
En Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:15:07 -0300, Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
The Linux man page unfortunately copies (verbatim) the FreeBSD man
page, which gets it wrong. You can not open a process, but you can
definitely open a pipe.
(Ok, if it doesn't agree with you, it must be wrong)
On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:09:18 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 06:40:10AM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:54:12 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
And if they model an action there must be some way to activate the
action
That's a reasonable
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 03:16:00PM -0700, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 03:09:18 -0400, Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
struct run {
int speed;
direction_type direction;
};
Not a function. Describes an action.
En Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:34:35 -0300, Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribi�:
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 03:16:00PM -0700, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 03:09:18 -0400, Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
struct run {
int speed;
En Mon, 01 Sep 2008 04:23:38 -0300, Jeremy Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
Hi. I wondered if anyone knew the rationale behind the naming of the
Popen class in the subprocess module. Popen sounds like the a suitable
name for a function that created a subprocess, but the object itself is
a
En Mon, 01 Sep 2008 04:23:38 -0300, Jeremy Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
Hi. I wondered if anyone knew the rationale behind the naming of the
Popen class in the subprocess module. Popen sounds like the a suitable
name for a function that created a subprocess, but the object itself is
a
On Sep 1, 9:23 am, Jeremy Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi. I wondered if anyone knew the rationale behind the naming of the
Popen class in the subprocess module. Popen sounds like the a suitable
name for a function that created a subprocess, but the object itself is
a subprocess, not a
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 05:02:07 -0700, Nicola Musatti wrote:
On Sep 1, 9:23 am, Jeremy Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi. I wondered if anyone knew the rationale behind the naming of the
Popen class in the subprocess module. Popen sounds like the a suitable
name for a function that created a
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 12:27:49PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
The Python class is a generalization of the standard Posix function of
(almost) the same name:
http://opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908775/xsh/popen.html
So it's a name of a *function* and it's a little bit unsuitable
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:28:42 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 12:27:49PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
wrote:
The Python class is a generalization of the standard Posix function
of (almost) the same name:
http://opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908775/xsh/popen.html
So
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 01:57:26PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
I would argue that they don't represent processes at all; the object is
a set of files which connect the standard I/O streams of a subprocess to
its parent, and methods to operate on those files.
And the process'
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 11:39:09 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 01:57:26PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
wrote:
I would argue that they don't represent processes at all; the object
is a set of files which connect the standard I/O streams of a
subprocess to its parent,
En Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:39:09 -0300, Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 01:57:26PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
I would argue that they don't represent processes at all; the object is
a set of files which connect the standard I/O streams of a subprocess
Gabriel Genellina wrote:
Classes represent things, and class names should be nouns.
Functions represent actions, and their names should be verbs. popen
is a good name for a function; Popen is a bad name for a class.
People who don't like Popen should have made this argument when
subprocess
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 06:47:39PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
That's why I think the name `Popen` is not so good for it. Because it
does more than `popen()` and if it is called `Subprocess` or just
`Process` then it would be merely an implementation detail, that the
`popen()`
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 05:22:51PM -0300, Gabriel Genellina wrote:
The name popen is an abbreviation of pipe open -- the function, and
the class, open pipes to communicate with another process. What you
said is correct; however there are numerous other ways to open
subprocesses. The
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 18:15:07 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
Classes represent things, and class names should be nouns.
Is that a law?
It's a common guideline.
Classes are instantiated by invoking their class names as a function
call -- the computing equivalent of a verb. Why then, must they
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 10:55:54PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 18:15:07 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
Classes represent things, and class names should be nouns.
Is that a law?
It's a common guideline.
Right. It's a guideline.
Classes are instantiated
Derek Martin wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 10:55:54PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
It's a way more self explaining name, even for people who know the
`popen()` function
I, and apparently the maintainers (at least at the time they added
this thing) don't agree. In fact I
Derek Martin wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 10:55:54PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
but the instances of `Popen` are no actions. There's no way to
execute a `Popen` instance.
Yes there is... you execute it when you instantiate the object. At
the time of instantiation, you open
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 12:20:18AM -0400, Miles wrote:
Derek Martin wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 10:55:54PM +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
but the instances of `Popen` are no actions. There's no way to
execute a `Popen` instance.
Yes there is... you execute it when you
Hi. I wondered if anyone knew the rationale behind the naming of the
Popen class in the subprocess module. Popen sounds like the a suitable
name for a function that created a subprocess, but the object itself is
a subprocess, not a popen. It seems that it would be more accurate to
just name
26 matches
Mail list logo
