Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: > On 5 Oct 2006 07:01:50 -0700, SpreadTooThin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [snip] > > > >Jean-Paul many thanks for this and your effort. > >but why is it every time I try to do something with 'stock' python I > >need another package? > > Maybe you are trying to do things that are too complex :) > No quite the contrary.. Which is why I want to keep it simple...
> >By the time I've finished my project there are like 5 3rd party add-ons > >to be installed. > > I don't generally find this to be problematic. > I have because it usually means makeing on many platforms... Most of the time this is the nightmare. > >I know I'm a python newbie... but I'm far from a developer newbie and > >that can be a recipe for > >disaster. > > Not every library can be part of the standard library, neither can the > standard library satisfy every possible use-case. Relying on 3rd party > modules isn't a bad thing. > No but the less number of lines of code I have to support the better. > >The stock socket should work and I think I've missed an > >obvious bug in the code other > >than checking the return status. > > > It was indeed as you said I was trying to read/write on the server socket not the client socket. (of the server module) > Well, I did mention one bug other than failure to check return values. > Maybe you missed it, since it was in the middle. Go back and re-read > my response. > Thanks again. B. > Jean-Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
