En Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:53:55 -0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> On Feb 22, 2:01 pm, Dennis Lee Bieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 08:35:03 -0800 (PST), "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
>>
>> > I don't think that is the problem, I'm feeding it newline characters.
>>
>> It wasn't shown in your sample, so I jumped on the first likely
>> thing...
>>
>> The second is in the hands of the subprocess... While you are
>> flushing output /to/ the subprocess, is IT flushing its output (the
>> stuff you are trying to read). A common problem seems to be that, as
>> soon as the process detects a pipe, it goes to buffered I/O, and if the
>> buffer isn't filled, the parent has no access...
>
> I'm actually running something like : r, w, e = popen2.popen3('python -
> u slave.py')
That was not on your posted example either...
> to try and force unbuffered. slave.py is basically outputting by
> using print.
> I guess it might still be buffering?
> Anyway, thanks for your thoughts... I may have to take an entirely
> difference approach. I was hoping not to have to touch the code base
> represented by slave.py.
[master.py]
import popen2
r, w, e = popen2.popen3('python -u slave.py')
w.write('command 1\n')
w.flush()
print r.readline()
w.write('command 2\n')
w.flush()
print r.readline()
w.write('\n')
w.flush()
print r.readline()
[slave.py]
while True:
line = raw_input().strip()
if not line:
print "bye!"
break
print "echo:",line
That works OK for me on Windows XP.
--
Gabriel Genellina
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
