Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #101174 > unrolled thread

Re: subprocess check_output

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: subprocess check_output Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 09:01 +1100
    Re: subprocess check_output me <self@example.org> - 2016-01-05 11:15 +0000
      Re: subprocess check_output Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 22:38 +1100
        Re: subprocess check_output me <self@example.org> - 2016-01-07 09:33 +0000
          Re: subprocess check_output Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 20:54 +1100
            Re: subprocess check_output Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-01-07 12:12 +0200
              Re: subprocess check_output Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-01-07 12:14 +0200
                Re: subprocess check_output Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 21:25 +1100

#101174 — Re: subprocess check_output

On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 7:39 AM, Carlos Barera <carlos.barera@gmail.com> wrote:
> Turns out it wasn't running against the server I thought it was.
> Apologies for the spam.

Heh. No problem. That's part of why I suggested running it from the
shell. There are two possibilities: either it also fails from the
shell (in which case you've eliminated Python as the problem, and can
concentrate on "why is my command not working"), or it succeeds when
run manually and still fails from Python (in which case you can start
investigating the differences). And every now and then, it's worth
doing a stupid smoke test just to see if your changes are even having
effect. You have no idea how many times a bug investigation has come
down to "whoops, I forgot to save the file" or "whoops, I was in the
wrong directory"...

ChrisA

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#101266

On 2016-01-02, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
> down to "whoops, I forgot to save the file" or "whoops, I was in the
> wrong directory"...

Amen, bro.

Exceptionally true if you ever need for some reason to put your code in
another directory, but you forget to close the files in your editor. :D

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101267

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:15 PM, me <self@example.org> wrote:
> On 2016-01-02, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
>> down to "whoops, I forgot to save the file" or "whoops, I was in the
>> wrong directory"...
>
> Amen, bro.
>
> Exceptionally true if you ever need for some reason to put your code in
> another directory, but you forget to close the files in your editor. :D

Oh, and then you keep editing and save again? Nah, I've *never* done
that... Never!

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101324

On 2016-01-05, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, and then you keep editing and save again? Nah, I've *never* done
> that... Never!

I'm quite surprised, buddy. You should definitely try.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101325

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:33 PM, me <self@example.org> wrote:
> On 2016-01-05, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Oh, and then you keep editing and save again? Nah, I've *never* done
>> that... Never!
>
> I'm quite surprised, buddy. You should definitely try.

I know, right! It's so exciting to suddenly discover that you have two
separate copies of a piece of code, and that one of them isn't where
you think it is... makes life so interesting!

Serious suggestion for people who run into weirdness: Sometimes it
helps to make a deliberate and obvious syntax error (misuse a keyword,
break the indentation, put a mass of symbols in someplace), just to
see that your code is getting parsed. If it doesn't trigger an error,
well, your deployment is failing somewhere. CSS gurus suggest, along
similar lines, changing the background color of something to red.
Saves ever so much fiddling around - instead of asking "why doesn't my
padding work in IE?", you ask the correct question of "why isn't my
CSS file being read?", upon which you discover that you were
referencing it from the wrong directory. True story.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101326

Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>:

> you ask the correct question of "why isn't my CSS file being read?"

TL;DR


Marko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101327

Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net>:

> Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>:
>
>> you ask the correct question of "why isn't my CSS file being read?"
>
> TL;DR

Sorry, getting confused with homonyms:

>> CSS gurus suggest, along similar lines, changing the background color
>> of something to red.


Marko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101329

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
> Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net>:
>
>> Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> you ask the correct question of "why isn't my CSS file being read?"
>>
>> TL;DR
>
> Sorry, getting confused with homonyms:
>
>
>>> CSS gurus suggest, along similar lines, changing the background color
>>> of something to red.
>
>

Oh. I think that wordplay was _exactly_ why the choice was red, rather
than an equally-obvious yellow or green or blue or something. "If the
body is red, the file was read".

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web