Guido van Rossum added the comment: Please add a comment explaining the complaint from epoll.poll() we're trying to avoid here.
I presume Tulip never gets into this state because of the self-pipe. On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 8:01 AM, STINNER Victor <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > STINNER Victor added the comment: > > It's a little bit surprising to call epoll_wait() without any FD > subscribed, but select([], [], [], delay) is a known way to sleep 'delay' > seconds, so why not using epoll in a similar way? :-) > > epoll_02.patch looks good to me. Can you please also apply the patch to > the Tulip project? > > (By the way, test_selectors.py to Tulip is completly different, we may > just reuse the file from CPython and drop the code from Tulip.) > > ---------- > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue23009> > _______________________________________ > ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23009> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com