On Fri, 02 May 2008 14:38:47 -0400, Roy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
mp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Roy. I was just trying to understand someone else's code, but
in the end it turns out that this was just a bug.
What weirded me out was how injecting a
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
mp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Roy. I was just trying to understand someone else's code, but
> in the end it turns out that this was just a bug.
>
> What weirded me out was how injecting a print statement preventing the
> error from occurring, but now I g
Thanks Roy. I was just trying to understand someone else's code, but
in the end it turns out that this was just a bug.
What weirded me out was how injecting a print statement preventing the
error from occurring, but now I get it. Without blocking, the
connection handshake occurs in parallel after
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
mp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Code is at bottom. Basically, if I turn off socket blocking prior to
> connecting, I get a "Socket is not connected" error when I try to send
> data. However, if I do not turn off blocking, OR if I place a print
> statement anywhere
Code is at bottom. Basically, if I turn off socket blocking prior to
connecting, I get a "Socket is not connected" error when I try to send
data. However, if I do not turn off blocking, OR if I place a print
statement anywhere before the send call, it works! WTF?
I'd like to understand what's goin
