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 yselivanov
Recipients Ben.Darnell, asvetlov, gvanrossum, pitrou, yselivanov
Date 2017-11-16.16:18:01
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1510849081.34.0.213398074469.issue32038@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
> It's worse than a resource leak - the same file descriptor number could be reused for a different file/socket, and then depending on the selector in use, you could see the data from a completely different connection. 

I actually debugged a bug like this in asyncio code once.  Took me quite a bit of time to figure it out.

> I did see a bug like this years ago (in libcurl), although it's not a common problem. I'd use the proposed hook if it existed, but it seems like an intrusive solution to a rare issue.

I don't think the proposed solution is too intrusive.  If we don't like the "set a callback to intercept all socket.close()" idea, we can change it to: "add socket.add_close_callback() method to the socket object."
History
Date User Action Args
2017-11-16 16:18:01yselivanovsetrecipients: + yselivanov, gvanrossum, pitrou, asvetlov, Ben.Darnell
2017-11-16 16:18:01yselivanovsetmessageid: <1510849081.34.0.213398074469.issue32038@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2017-11-16 16:18:01yselivanovlinkissue32038 messages
2017-11-16 16:18:01yselivanovcreate