Author akira
Recipients Andrew.Boettcher, ajaksu2, akira, astrand, cvrebert, ericpruitt, eryksun, giampaolo.rodola, gvanrossum, janzert, josiahcarlson, martin.panter, ooooooooo, parameter, r.david.murray, rosslagerwall, sbt, techtonik, v+python, vstinner, yselivanov
Date 2014-07-24.11:28:33
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <877g33m1wi.fsf@gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1406159493.72.0.265844627577.issue1191964@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> (STINNER Victor's message of "Wed, 23 Jul 2014 23:51:34 +0000")
Content
STINNER Victor <report@bugs.python.org> writes:
>
>> I have implemented and would continue to lean towards continuing to
> hide BrokenPipeError on the additional API endpoints.
>
> FYI asyncio.Process.communicate() ignores BrokenPipeError and
> ConnectionResetError, whereas asyncio.Process.stdin.drain() (coroutine
> to wait until all bytes are written) raises a BrokenPipeError or
> ConnectionResetError if the child process exited. I think subprocess
> has the same design.

Do Popen.write_nonblocking() and Popen.read_nonblocking() methods
belong to the second category? Should they raise BrokenPipeError?
History
Date User Action Args
2014-07-24 11:28:33akirasetrecipients: + akira, gvanrossum, josiahcarlson, astrand, parameter, vstinner, techtonik, giampaolo.rodola, ajaksu2, ooooooooo, v+python, r.david.murray, cvrebert, ericpruitt, Andrew.Boettcher, rosslagerwall, sbt, martin.panter, janzert, yselivanov, eryksun
2014-07-24 11:28:33akiralinkissue1191964 messages
2014-07-24 11:28:33akiracreate