Kristján Valur Jónsson <krist...@ccpgames.com> added the comment: I cannot see from the link to which branch that was committed, or what revision. But I assume it is the default branch. I can confirm that this appears to be fixed.
The corresponding defect has a long (and bothersome) discussion. I am, however, surprised that this was not considered a "bug" and backported. The "bug" is pretty clear: socket.gettimeout() returns None, and yet socket.recv() returns in EWOULDBLOCK. This is clearly against spec, since the gettimeout() == None means that the socket is supposed to be blocking. I can agree with the fix (my number 1 suggestion) but I would have liked to see it done in socketmodule.c where the timeout semantics are all defined, rather than as a cludgy special case in socket.py ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11721> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
