Message 178943 - Python tracker

➜

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	sbt
Recipients	amaury.forgeotdarc, ezio.melotti, pitrou, santoso.wijaya, sbt, socketpair, vstinner
Date	2013-01-03.13:11:57
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<1357218717.62.0.608128704551.issue12939@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
A while ago I did write a PipeIO class which subclasses io.RawIOBase and works for overlapped pipe handles. (It was intended for multiprocessing and doing asynchronous IO with subprocess.) As it is it would not work with normal files because when you do overlapped IO on files you must manually track the file position. > Yes, re-writing windows IO to direct API, without intemediate layer is still > needed. What are the expected benefits? > It would help feature #12105 to implement "O_CLOEXEC" flag using the > lpSecurityAttributes argument. Isn't O_NOINHERIT the Windows equivalent of O_CLOEXEC?

A while ago I did write a PipeIO class which subclasses io.RawIOBase and works for overlapped pipe handles.  (It was intended for multiprocessing and doing asynchronous IO with subprocess.)

As it is it would not work with normal files because when you do overlapped IO on files you must manually track the file position.

> Yes, re-writing windows IO to direct API, without intemediate layer is still 
> needed.

What are the expected benefits?

> It would help feature #12105 to implement "O_CLOEXEC" flag using the 
> lpSecurityAttributes argument.

Isn't O_NOINHERIT the Windows equivalent of O_CLOEXEC?

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2013-01-03 13:11:57	sbt	set	recipients: + sbt, amaury.forgeotdarc, pitrou, vstinner, ezio.melotti, santoso.wijaya, socketpair
2013-01-03 13:11:57	sbt	set	messageid: <1357218717.62.0.608128704551.issue12939@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2013-01-03 13:11:57	sbt	link	issue12939 messages
2013-01-03 13:11:57	sbt	create