This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author pitrou
Recipients akuchling, brian.curtin, exarkun, neologix, pitrou, schmir, trent
Date 2010-09-21.15:40:58
SpamBayes Score 1.0438309e-05
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1285083660.8.0.846828951615.issue2643@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
It's a pity that flush() is defined like this. Ideally, if mmap claims to mimick ordinary file objects, flush() should be a no-op() and there should be a separate sync() method.

On the other hand, your (Charles-François's) patch is already much better than the statu quo.
If nobody objects, I think it should be committed to 3.2. Whether or not we should be backport it to the stable branches is a bit more delicate, since it /could/ break badly written applications...

On a sidenote, the mmap object has received a *lot* less attention during the years than the other IO primitives (especially file objects in 3.x). It should probably only be used for specialized cases.
History
Date User Action Args
2010-09-21 15:41:00pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, akuchling, exarkun, schmir, trent, brian.curtin, neologix
2010-09-21 15:41:00pitrousetmessageid: <1285083660.8.0.846828951615.issue2643@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2010-09-21 15:40:58pitroulinkissue2643 messages
2010-09-21 15:40:58pitroucreate