Message14328
Logged In: YES
user_id=21627
I think the test is somewhat bogus: It tries to check that
modification to an ACCESS_COPY doesn't modify the underlying
file, but assumes that .flush becomes a no-op, even though
an exception is more reasonable (IMO; errors should never
pass silently).
So I see two options: Declare that .flush() always raises an
exception (and modify implementations that don't produce an
exception accordingly), or declare that aspect to be
system-dependent, and modify the test (and the
documentation) to expect and ignore an exception.
Assigning to Tim, as he incorporated that feature into mmap. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2007-08-23 14:10:36 | admin | link | issue678250 messages |
2007-08-23 14:10:36 | admin | create | |
|