Author pitrou
Recipients Ben.Darnell, christian.heimes, giampaolo.rodola, janssen, nikratio, pitrou, r.david.murray
Date 2014-03-26.10:34:18
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1395830055.2305.1.camel@fsol>
In-reply-to <1395798837.72.0.670467013829.issue20951@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> I vote -1 to adding a new flag to control whether it returns zero or
> raises and +0 to just fixing it in Python 3.5 (I don't think returning
> zero is an unreasonable thing to do; it's not obvious to me from
> send(2) that it is guaranteed to never return zero although I believe
> that to be the case).  It'll break Tornado, but there will be plenty
> of time to get a fix out before then.

If that's your opinion then I'm inclined to trust you.

> Another option may be to have SSLSocket.send() convert the WANT_WRITE
> exception into a socket.error with errno EAGAIN. 

I don't think it's a good idea, since it hides the true reason of the
error (also, it suppresses the distinction between WANT_READ and
WANT_WRITE, which tells you whether you need to select() the socket for
reading or writing).
History
Date User Action Args
2014-03-26 10:34:18pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, janssen, giampaolo.rodola, christian.heimes, r.david.murray, nikratio, Ben.Darnell
2014-03-26 10:34:18pitroulinkissue20951 messages
2014-03-26 10:34:18pitroucreate