pfreixes added the comment: I would like to focus the issue as was initially described, Im still convinced that this is a buggy behaviour. As has been seen other systems such as python sync or nodejs behaves as is expected.
This last one is IMHO something that can be skipped. Im wondering how curio or trio will handle this scenario. My bet is on as nodejs. El 07/07/2017 17:06, "Guido van Rossum" <rep...@bugs.python.org> escribió: > > Guido van Rossum added the comment: > > But half closed state is already supported. > > On Jul 7, 2017 2:37 AM, "Dima Tisnek" <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > > > > Dima Tisnek added the comment: > > > > It seems Guido sets a higher bar on the proposed change. > > > > @pfreixes, if you can show that this change is needed to implement "TCP > > half-closed" state (i.e. when remote calls shutdown(SHUT_WR) after it's > > done sending data but continues to recv(), then local is expected to read > > out the data, and then confirm reception and issue it's own > > shutdown(SHUT_WR) so that remote gets the acknowledgement), then there > > would be no question. > > > > ---------- > > > > _______________________________________ > > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > > <http://bugs.python.org/issue30861> > > _______________________________________ > > > > ---------- > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue30861> > _______________________________________ > ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue30861> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
