Author neologix
Recipients SilentGhost, eric.araujo, facundobatista, georg.brandl, josiahcarlson, lorenz, neologix, pitrou, schmir
Date 2011-06-11.16:40:13
SpamBayes Score 1.85865e-09
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <BANLkTi=tB9RyR+P8B06Rcarzj6sRcN2Zsg@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1307722526.89.0.276264925751.issue10897@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> Perhaps by adding some new argument to the mmap constructor? (dup_fd = True)

I don't really like the idea of exposing the FD duplication to the
user, because:
- it's an implementation detail
- it doesn't reflect any argument of the POSIX mmap version
- it should False by default

I really think that application code expecting to be able to resize
the mmap after closing the FD is broken, but I'm also a really strong
advocate of backward compatibility...
I don't see any satisfying solution.
History
Date User Action Args
2011-06-11 16:40:14neologixsetrecipients: + neologix, georg.brandl, facundobatista, josiahcarlson, pitrou, schmir, eric.araujo, SilentGhost, lorenz
2011-06-11 16:40:13neologixlinkissue10897 messages
2011-06-11 16:40:13neologixcreate