Message214889
> 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). |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2014-03-26 10:34:18 | pitrou | set | recipients:
+ pitrou, janssen, giampaolo.rodola, christian.heimes, r.david.murray, nikratio, Ben.Darnell |
2014-03-26 10:34:18 | pitrou | link | issue20951 messages |
2014-03-26 10:34:18 | pitrou | create | |
|