Message 214878 - 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	nikratio
Recipients	Ben.Darnell, christian.heimes, giampaolo.rodola, janssen, nikratio, pitrou, r.david.murray
Date	2014-03-26.02:51:06
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<53324092.4020902@rath.org>
In-reply-to	<1395798837.72.0.670467013829.issue20951@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>

Content
On 03/25/2014 06:53 PM, Ben Darnell wrote: > Another option may be to have SSLSocket.send() convert the WANT_WRITE exception into a socket.error with errno EAGAIN. This wouldn't break Tornado and would make socket.send and SSLSocket.send more consistent, but it's weird to hide the true error like this. I think that would only make sense if the SSLWant{Read/Write}Error exceptions are eliminated completely, so that all methods raise BlockingError (==EAGAIN) instead. Raising BlockingError is marginally better than returning zero, but I think not worth the change.

On 03/25/2014 06:53 PM, Ben Darnell wrote:
> Another option may be to have SSLSocket.send() convert the WANT_WRITE exception into a socket.error with errno EAGAIN.  This wouldn't break Tornado and would make socket.send and SSLSocket.send more consistent, but it's weird to hide the true error like this.

I think that would only make sense if the SSLWant{Read/Write}Error
exceptions are eliminated completely, so that all methods raise
BlockingError (==EAGAIN) instead.

Raising BlockingError is marginally better than returning zero, but I
think not worth the change.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2014-03-26 02:51:06	nikratio	set	recipients: + nikratio, janssen, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, christian.heimes, r.david.murray, Ben.Darnell
2014-03-26 02:51:06	nikratio	link	issue20951 messages
2014-03-26 02:51:06	nikratio	create