skorpeo <skorpe...@gmail.com> added the comment: yes, in this case they were meant to stay open to write and read multiple messages. I was hoping to read data when it is available, the other work around was to specify n, but that also blocked once there was no more data to be fetched....Either way I will stick to queues and this appears to be expected behavior so you can disregard the report. I should have known better that I wasn't going to find a bug in python :)
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 2:03 AM, Yury Selivanov <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > Yury Selivanov <yseliva...@gmail.com> added the comment: > > > You are also correct that there is no clean up for closing the pipes. > > It's not just about the cleanup. If you don't close the pipes, they will > be open forever, so there will be no EOF for which read(-1) will wait > forever. > > ---------- > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <https://bugs.python.org/issue33662> > _______________________________________ > ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33662> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
