Author gregory.p.smith
Recipients foom, gregory.p.smith, loewis, mwh, pitrou, rnk
Date 2011-01-07.05:08:16
SpamBayes Score 4.06128e-08
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
> IMO, if we give the illusion that the interpreter was actually killed,
> we should equate KeyboardInterrupt with SIGINT; any uncaught
> KeyboardInterrupt should consequently always lead to raising SIGINT.

Agreed.  Plus that is easier to implement and what I did.

I'll remove the left over TODO(gps) comments (oops) before this is
ever committed. I'm waiting until after 3.2 is released unless the
release manager jumps in and says otherwise.  remaining items:

 1. I need to add a second test case that writes the code to a file
and launches a subprocess executing that file instead of using -c
given that they are different code paths that each need testing.  For
variety I'll probably make that one send an actual SIGINT to the child
process rather than having it raise KeyboardInterrupt.

 2. The tests probably needs a decorator to limit their execution to posix.

 3. Do the signal and kill calls also need to be conditional based on
platform or is the function I put them in already posix-only?  If
necessary I'll protect them with #ifdefs so they don't break a windows
Date User Action Args
2011-01-07 05:08:17gregory.p.smithsetrecipients: + gregory.p.smith, mwh, loewis, foom, pitrou, rnk
2011-01-07 05:08:16gregory.p.smithlinkissue1054041 messages
2011-01-07 05:08:16gregory.p.smithcreate