Xiang Zhang <angwe...@126.com> added the comment:
> I don't think to make selector be a public property is a good idea. It will > break the whole system integrity. If exposing a private property is not a good idea, another choice may be construct a selector with a customized I/O multiplexer, adding an optional parameter to the __init__. But actually I'm -1 to this change. `selectors` makes underlying implementations irrelavant to most users since we can simply use `DefaultSelector`(maybe why only read/write events are valid now?). But you are seeking to add implementation specific details back. If you know you want to add EPOLL_EXCLUSIVE, why not just use `select.epoll`? A single selector doesn't do much more than the underlying multiplexer. ---------- nosy: +xiang.zhang _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue35517> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
