Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Can anyone take a loot at those patches?
Do they need more tests?
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue7
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
You're very kind David.
Hope I can contribute with something more relevant next time :)
best regards,
Felipe
2011/7/18 R. David Murray
>
> R. David Murray added the comment:
>
> Thank you both for your work on this. The patch I committed i
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
I've rewrote those patches to 'default' and 2.7
--
nosy: +felipecruz
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21641/issue7484-py3k.diff
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.py
Changes by Felipe Cruz :
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21642/issue7484-27.diff
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue7484>
___
___
Python-bugs-list m
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
David..
I extracted quoteaddr code to _addrformat and now quoteaddr and _addronly call
_addrformat passing a format (<%s> or %s).
I've also created quoteaddr and _addronly test functions as well modified VRFY
and EXPN tests to make sure they call _a
Changes by Felipe Cruz :
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21652/issue7484-27_2.diff
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue7484>
___
___
Python-bugs-list m
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Looks like PyErr_WriteUnraisable can be a better choice. Exceptions at random
execution points looks a little bit dirty at least for this case.
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Looks good.
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16105>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Hello!
This is one of my first patches.
Tests still OK! Let me know what you think!
Thanks!
--
keywords: +patch
nosy: +felipecruz
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27191/issue15897_v1.patch
___
Python tracker
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Patch updated - fseek errors messges will be "can't read Zip file' and not
"can't Open Zip file"
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27192/issue15897_v1.patch
___
Python tr
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
I've updated the patch changing fseek_error goto block error return from
PyErr_SetFromErrno to PyErr_Format(ZipImportError, "can't read Zip file: %R",
archive); (returning NULL after).
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27194
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
v4 - inline fseek return code check - as Christian suggested
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27195/issue15897_v4.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
I can submit patches..
Is there any problem to send 1 patch per module?
--
nosy: +felipecruz
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Add tests for {RawIO,BufferedIO,TextIO}.writelines()
--
keywords: +patch
nosy: +felipecruz
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27200/issue15744_v1.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Updated based on Pitrou comments
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27220/issue15744_v2.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Hello!
Just sent the Contributor Agreement Form.
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15897>
___
___
Python-bug
New submission from Felipe Cruz:
It's possible to set a read only FD to signal.set_wakeup_fd(fd)
Since write call[1] inside 'trip_signal' return code is ignored, no error will
be raised.
An untested solution is to call fcntl in this FD to check presence of write
f
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
I would not say that is a bug, but there is a write(wakeup_fd) call with
ignored return code and maybe this can be improved to an output to stderr, or
maybe a better solution.
--
___
Python tracker
<h
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Should I send patches for 3.2 and 2.7?
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15897>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailin
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Hello,
since Antonie mentioned Py_AddPendingCall I came up with a patch describing
what he proposed.
Let me know if this patch can be improved or discarded(if the problem requires
a more sophisticated solution). In case of improvement I can also submit
another
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
> Why limit to EBADF? You could also have EPIPE, EINVAL and many other errors.
> The only error you may not want to report is EAGAIN.
Charles,
You're right! If all errno cases get covered in the patch, will It looks
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
> Raising an error in case the signal can't be written to the FD
> (because the other end didn't drain the pipe/socket) seems reasonable.
> You should just retry on EINTR (although any sane implementation
> shouldn't return EINTR on
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
This patch retries write() until success if errno == EINTR.
There is also a test.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27428/issue16105_v3.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
I've followed latest suggestions.
Test and code updated.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27598/issue16105_v4.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/is
New submission from Felipe Cruz:
Current pending calls limit is too small and it can be easily reached in very
intensive async file io applications.
There is a little hack in pyaio[1] which sleeps if Py_AddPendingCall returns <
0 but It's not totally clear to me why the size of pendi
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Just confirmed that signals is not a viable option. Is too slow, as Antonie
already pointed. It's almost 5 times slower than with SIGEV_THREAD.
The problem now is:
If I use Py_AddPendingCall, the tests can hang sometimes. I can still follow
Amaury sugge
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Running test_aio_read
[New Thread 0x77ff7700 (LWP 20681)]
[New Thread 0x761ff700 (LWP 20682)]
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0x761ff700 (LWP 20682)]
sem_post () at ../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Yes! 2.7.3 build with pydebug.
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16565>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsub
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Without debug backtrace
#0 sem_post () at ../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/sem_post.S:34
#1 0x004d456e in PyGILState_Release ()
#2 0x759b9cdc in notify_func_wrapper (arg=0x78c0) at
../sysdeps/pthread/aio_notify.c:45
#3
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
I think you have a point. Did you know about the tulip project?
http://code.google.com/p/tulip/source/browse/tulip/unix_events.py#76
It has a PollsterBase class and a SelectPollster(PollsterBase) so the idea is
to have a Poller(and you call poll()) but select
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Hi Antonie,
What you said also makes sense to me.
There is one problem(?) that _map_events() is called for every event(for Poll
and EPoll) and this can make things slower (I didn't tested it). Also, does it
needs to be thread
Felipe Cruz added the comment:
Hi.. 2 comments related to Kqueue/OSX(16.8)
1 - In tulip/selectors.py L311 and L314 - is key.fd not fd
2 - In EventLoopTestsMixin::test_writer_callback if the writer socket isn't
non-blocking, the test hangs forever..
3 - Errors:
ERROR: testCreateSslTran
New submission from Felipe Cruz:
I'm using TimedRotatingFileHandler to rotate a log file *every* minute.
If I stop my program, in the middle of a minute, and start again, the next
rotation will happen at (currentTime + 60). The result of this behavior is that
I'll end up with fil
33 matches
Mail list logo
