On Wed, 2013-02-13 at 00:08 +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: > Alle mercoledì 13 febbraio 2013, Svante Signell ha scritto: > > On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 23:52 +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: > > > Alle martedì 12 febbraio 2013, Svante Signell ha scritto: > > > > * change the FD_SETSIZE upper value check to larger than or > > > > equal > > > > > > > > from larger than. > > > > (from POSIX definition of select: > > > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009604499/functions/select.h > > > > tml ) > > > > > > It's > > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/select.ht > > > ml > > > > > > actually, and it says: > > > |[EINVAL] > > > | > > > | The nfds argument is less than 0 or greater than FD_SETSIZE. > > > > > > and not "greater or equal than", so it allows FD_SETSIZE. > > > (And logically, if a fdset_t can contain at most FD_SETSIZE fd's, > > > you need to allow FD_SETSIZE as maximum number of fd's.) > > > > > > Please remove this change, which is wrong. > > > > Then you have to convince the Linux man page and the python3.2 > > developers too. From python3.2: > > ./Include/fileobject.h: #define _PyIsSelectable_fd(FD) (((FD) >= 0) > > && ((FD) < FD_SETSIZE)) > > Feel free to open bugs about them, then. >
On the same page you have this (and in the old link) The behavior of these macros is undefined if the fd argument is less than 0 or greater than or equal to FD_SETSIZE, or if fd is not a valid file descriptor, or if any of the arguments are expressions with side-effects.
