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 pitrou
Recipients alexandre.vassalotti, gregory.p.smith, loewis, pitrou
Date 2008-07-23.09:19:54
SpamBayes Score 0.000566013
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1216804783.4886f7af1cba1@imp.free.fr>
In-reply-to <1216782150.94.0.927313067142.issue2523@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> When I revised the patch I had a weak understanding of nonblocking I/O.
> I thought the "exponential" reads were for nonblocking I/O, but I see
> now that is non-sense.

Fine, so it will make the patch simpler.

As for non-blocking IO, I think we should raise the general issue on
python-3000. There is no real support for it right now, by which I mean (1) no
easy and portable way of enable non-blocking IO on a file object and (2) no test
cases of non-blocking IO in real-world conditions (rather than with mock
objects). This shouldn't stop us from fixing the present bug though.

> I am not sure, but I think Martin is also right about the second loop.
> The max() call should be changed back to "max(self.buffer_size, n))",
> like in the 2nd patch.

Ok. Could you produce an updated patch? :)
History
Date User Action Args
2008-07-23 09:19:57pitrousetspambayes_score: 0.000566013 -> 0.000566013
recipients: + pitrou, loewis, gregory.p.smith, alexandre.vassalotti
2008-07-23 09:19:56pitroulinkissue2523 messages
2008-07-23 09:19:54pitroucreate