Message82568
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 at 13:14, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Antoine Pitrou <pitrou@free.fr> added the comment:
>
> RDM, all the classes you mentioned should indeed be able to do "short
> reads" on pipes, sockets and the like. That's how they are tested in
> test_io.py: against mock raw i/o classes which only return a few bytes
> at a time (e.g. only 5 bytes will be filled in a 4096-byte buffer).
My questions in the last comment were directed at trying to clarify
the documentation.
I think my most important point there is whether or not 'read1' should
be added to the BufferedIOBase ABI. I believe it should be, since
if a class derived from BufferedIOBase does not implement it and is
passed to TextIOWrapper, it will fail.
> However, I encourage you once again to *experiment* with the 3.x i.o
> library and share your results with us. This is the best way for us to
> know whether common use cases are really covered.
As I said, I plan to do so. I needed to understand the intent first,
though, and reading the docs resulted in some doc questions. Should I
be opening each point in a separate issue and/or providing a suggested
doc patch? I'm new to trying to help out via the tracker, so best
practice pointers are welcome.
--RDM |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2009-02-21 14:46:47 | r.david.murray | set | recipients:
+ r.david.murray, amaury.forgeotdarc, pitrou |
2009-02-21 14:43:16 | r.david.murray | link | issue5323 messages |
2009-02-21 14:43:15 | r.david.murray | create | |
|