Inquiry regarding the name of subprocess.Popen class

[Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch]

On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 05:02:07 -0700, Nicola Musatti wrote:

> On Sep 1, 9:23 am, Jeremy Banks <jer... at jeremybanks.ca> 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

So it's a name of a *function* and it's a little bit unsuitable for a 
*class*.  As Jeremy wrote: the instances represent *processes* not 
"popen"s, whatever that may be.

Ciao,
	Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch