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 "popen". It seems that it would be more accurate to > just name the class Subprocess, can anyone explain why this is not the > case?
The Python class is a generalization of the standard Posix function of (almost) the same name: http://opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908775/xsh/popen.html Cheers, Nicola Musatti -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
