Gregory P. Smith <g...@krypto.org> added the comment: > IMO, if we give the illusion that the interpreter was actually killed, > we should equate KeyboardInterrupt with SIGINT; any uncaught > KeyboardInterrupt should consequently always lead to raising SIGINT.
Agreed. Plus that is easier to implement and what I did. I'll remove the left over TODO(gps) comments (oops) before this is ever committed. I'm waiting until after 3.2 is released unless the release manager jumps in and says otherwise. remaining items: 1. I need to add a second test case that writes the code to a file and launches a subprocess executing that file instead of using -c given that they are different code paths that each need testing. For variety I'll probably make that one send an actual SIGINT to the child process rather than having it raise KeyboardInterrupt. 2. The tests probably needs a decorator to limit their execution to posix. 3. Do the signal and kill calls also need to be conditional based on platform or is the function I put them in already posix-only? If necessary I'll protect them with #ifdefs so they don't break a windows build. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1054041> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
