Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rod...@gmail.com> added the comment:
I've never used socket.socket.makefile so I'm not sure, but its documentation
says:
> The socket must be in blocking mode (it can not have a timeout).
If the statement is there because EAGAIN/EWOULDBLOCK were originally raised
then it should be removed, otherwise I question whether makefile() is actually
supposed to support non-blocking sockets in the first place.
IMO, I think it's a matter of figuring out whether makefile() should provide a
socket-like behavior or a file like-behavior first.
In the first case I would expect all errors be raised as if I'm dealing with a
common socket, otherwise they should be silenced/handled internally or
makefile() just fail immediately as there's not such thing as "non-blocking
files".
> Instead, readinto() should detect the blocking condition (EAGAIN /
> EWOULDBLOCK) and
> return None (same for write(), I imagine).
io.RawIOBase.readinto doc says:
> Read up to len(b) bytes into bytearray b and return the number of bytes read.
...so returning 0 instead of None looks more natural to me.
Same for write, also because:
>>> open('xxx', 'w').write('')
0
I've also noticed that socket.SocketIO.readinto has a while loop which
continues in case of EINTR and that's something which should be removed in case
makefile() actually intends to support non-blocking sockets.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue9854>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
