Author martin.panter
Recipients martin.panter, mbussonn, serhiy.storchaka, takluyver
Date 2016-01-29.01:48:06
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1454032087.36.0.569339105178.issue26039@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I left some review comments.

Since the rules for read-only and write-only access are so different, would it make more sense to have a separate method? Maybe your writefile() name, or open_write() or something? I am not too fussed, but unless there is a chance of being able to open a read-write random access file, I find these split-personality open() methods a bit “un-Pythonic”. On the other hand, I guess it is superficially consistent with other open() functions.

Also, perhaps if you guaranteed the write-only option returned a file-like object, you could use shutil.copyfileobj() rather than a custom read-write loop.
History
Date User Action Args
2016-01-29 01:48:07martin.pantersetrecipients: + martin.panter, takluyver, serhiy.storchaka, mbussonn
2016-01-29 01:48:07martin.pantersetmessageid: <1454032087.36.0.569339105178.issue26039@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-01-29 01:48:07martin.panterlinkissue26039 messages
2016-01-29 01:48:06martin.pantercreate