Andrej A Antonov <polymor...@gmail.com> added the comment: Jeff McNeil (mcjeff)> I would think it might make more sense just to make the change to the Transport object. Since there's an argument for a transport on ServerProxy already, that seems more straightforward and keeps the network layer isolated.
in theoretical-side -- this layer isolation may be good and clean. but in practical-side -- situation is next: there are 3 alternative-variants of using timeout parameter in XMLRPC-Client: situation 1. programmer (who makes script or program) -- using XMLRPC-Client *WITH* timeout parameter, because timeout parameter should be using in his program. program runs in regular environment. situation 2. programmer (who makes script or program) -- using XMLRPC-Client *WITHOUT* timeout parameter, because XMLRPC-connection runs in localhost environment. situation 3. programmer (who makes script or program) -- using XMLRPC-Client *WITHOUT* timeout parameter, because he makes mistake. "situation 1" -- very often. (or must be very often). "situation 2" -- very rare. "situation 3" -- leads to possible cases of freezing program/script or resource-leak. if we will try to hide timeout parameter (in other layer), then "situation 3" will be more than "situation 1" # p.s.: sorry for my bad english ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14134> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
