That's because the socket.py code has been adapted (the first word I wrote
there was "perverted" :--) to deal with this case.  That is, the close() has
been rendered meaningless because of the explicit reference counting in
socket.py.  But the right solution is to not close the socket till the
application is done with it; that is, transfer the responsibility for the
socket to the part of the application which is still using it.  I'm not sure
that just fixing this one case will remove the need for the explicit
reference counting in socket.py, but this is the case that I noticed.

On Nov 26, 2007 1:11 PM, Guido van Rossum <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:

>
> Guido van Rossum added the comment:
>
> Bill, is there a code example that should work but breaks because of
> that close()?  ATM, there doesn't seem to be anything in the tests that
> breaks...
>
> __________________________________
> Tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1348>
> __________________________________
>