-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Change open(cmd) to return Process instead of Tuple #12807
Conversation
If I'm groking this change correctly, I think it's an improvement. Can you give an example of the new usage as opposed to the old one (which I never cared for)? |
just take a look at the PR diff, since most of it is to deal with the impact of the switch on usages in this repo |
Wouldn't it be fairly straightforward to add deprecated methods to iterate a process object? |
somewhat, it's just really strange to define the iteration to first return either |
Agreed, but it's just for deprecation purposes, it's not like we'd be advocating that API (quite the opposite). |
955fab4
to
422521d
Compare
alright, I think those methods should cover the most common usages of the previous definition |
422521d
to
db79a03
Compare
Is there any chance of having this merged before 0.4 is released? I'm almost ready to release a new Gaston version to go along with 0.4, but this issue is holding it up. |
Unlikely unless this gets changed to not be breaking. |
db79a03
to
0712f9c
Compare
rebased. should I merge this and see whether it plays out as a good change, or perhaps suggests an even better design in the future? |
I think it's too late for this to get into 0.4, unfortunately. |
The question was for master, not 0.4 |
Oh, right, that's a different story |
base/deprecated.jl
Outdated
@@ -770,6 +770,16 @@ end | |||
const FloatingPoint = AbstractFloat | |||
export FloatingPoint | |||
|
|||
# 12807 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
move to new 0.5 section along with AsyncStream
this is failing due to a (subtle but common) bug in the test of our IO framework. anyone care to take the shot at guessing? |
Clearly nobody guessed. Does it still apply? Also, does this implement the
portion of the suggested change? I'm not seeing that. |
does this need doc changes? along with a rebase obviously |
Bump. |
@vtjnash – I'm pretty overloaded right now. Any chance you could dust this off on move it forward? |
0712f9c
to
06a2be1
Compare
dusted. 🙂 |
base/deprecated.jl
Outdated
@@ -1307,6 +1307,15 @@ end | |||
end | |||
end | |||
|
|||
# 12807 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
post 0.6
Use variable name |
It's both: the process objects are also |
06a2be1
to
85f3fc7
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
deprecations need to move to 0.7 section
85f3fc7
to
505dec5
Compare
missed from #12807, only happens when running in mintty
missed from #12807, only happens when running in mintty
missed from #12807, only happens when running in mintty
Docstring here Line 571 in 9e3318c
|
Just fyi, the above docstring is still the old one, needs updating. |
This is the pull request I made long before to fix the docstring: #25563. |
fixes #9659 by changing open(Cmd) to only return a Process, and defining close(Process) to mean
close(Process.in) && close(Process.out)
. this is a breaking change, since i know of no way to sanely provide a deprecation for this (I would prefer not to define iteration over a Process object as returning the old tuple of (io, process))