Message132584
> The corresponding defect has a long (and bothersome) discussion. I am,
> however, surprised that this was not considered a "bug" and backported.
I think Martin's argument was that it could break compatibility.
> I can agree with the fix (my number 1 suggestion) but I would have
> liked to see it done in socketmodule.c where the timeout semantics are
> all defined, rather than as a cludgy special case in socket.py
There's definitely a reason for doing it in socket.py rather than socketmodule.c, although I don't remember which one. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2011-03-30 13:08:52 | pitrou | set | recipients:
+ pitrou, kristjan.jonsson |
2011-03-30 13:08:52 | pitrou | set | messageid: <1301490532.49.0.765306088977.issue11721@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2011-03-30 13:08:49 | pitrou | link | issue11721 messages |
2011-03-30 13:08:49 | pitrou | create | |
|