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 loewis
Recipients doko, exarkun, lekma, loewis, nvetoshkin, pitrou
Date 2010-10-17.18:24:57
SpamBayes Score 4.27475e-07
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
> That's another possibility, in which case we would first remove the
> current accept4-calling code in order to fix the buildbot failure.

In Python, the lowest layer facing the operating system always directly
exposes the API as-is, without reinterpreting the user's request. Not
following this principle leads exactly to this kind of problem.

So I think .accept() should only call accept(2), and accept4() should
only be called if explicitly requested by the application.

Exposing it as .accept4(flags) is certainly the most straight-forward
way of doing it, but I could also live with .accept(flags) (i.e.
call accept4 if flags are being passed, hoping that no other system
comes up with another accept extension that has a different integer
Date User Action Args
2010-10-17 18:25:00loewissetrecipients: + loewis, doko, exarkun, pitrou, lekma, nvetoshkin
2010-10-17 18:24:59loewislinkissue10115 messages
2010-10-17 18:24:57loewiscreate