"Gregory P. Smith" <greg@krypto.org> wrote:
> Sleeping on the issue some more and pondering it...
>
> Is there any _good_ reason not to just make the close_fds default change in
> 3.2 today? �No warning (since they're never seen by most people anyways).
> �Document it in Misc/NEWS and whatsnew.rst.

Yes, it will break many scripts under Windows.
That's the core of the issue, really. I agree under Unix it makes
sense to change the default.

Sorry, yes, I was ignoring windows in the above statement. �I only want the change in default on unix, windows has different needs.
�
">

(original) (raw)



On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:

On Sun, 5 Dec 2010 11:08:43 -0800

"Gregory P. Smith" <greg@krypto.org> wrote:
> Sleeping on the issue some more and pondering it...
>
> Is there any \_good\_ reason not to just make the close\_fds default change in
> 3.2 today? �No warning (since they're never seen by most people anyways).
> �Document it in Misc/NEWS and whatsnew.rst.

Yes, it will break many scripts under Windows.
That's the core of the issue, really. I agree under Unix it makes
sense to change the default.

Sorry, yes, I was ignoring windows in the above statement. �I only want the change in default on unix, windows has different needs.
�

Regards

Antoine.


\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/greg%40krypto.org