Richard Oudkerk added the comment:
> select() other than being supported on all platforms has the advantage of
> being simple and quick to use (you just call it once by passing a set of fds
> and then you're done).
Do you mean at the C level? Wouldn't you just do
struct pollfd pfd = {fd, POLLIN, 0};
if (poll(&pfd, 1, timeout) < 0) {...}
ready = pfd.revents != 0;
That does not look any less simple and quick.
> on the other hand you introduce a considerable slowdown given the amount
> of operations involved and described above.
poll(), unlike select(), does not have to scan an fd_set (of 1024 bits?) so I
would have expected it to be faster if anything.
At the python level creating a new poll object each time might indeed be
slower, but one could always cache it on the queue object.
BTW, are there any non-Windows platforms which support multiprocessing but
don't have poll()? (On Windows WaitForSingleObject() is used instead.)
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16269>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
