Eryk Sun <eryk...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> So the idea is to delete the file for a brief period, but then
> undelete it.
Currently NTFS defaults to using classic delete semantics for delete-on-close.
However, it supports POSIX delete semantics for delete-on-close, so the default
could change in a future release. When delete-on-close uses POSIX semantics,
closing the last handle to the kernel File immediately unlinks the file. The
upside is that a filesystem that uses POSIX delete semantics for
delete-on-close should support SetFileInformationByHandle:
FileDispositionInfoEx, which allows directly removing the delete-on-close flag.
That said, I can't stomach having to manually overwrite, truncate, delete and
undelete files in order to avoid side effects if _open_osfhandle() fails. IMO,
if opening a file has serious side effects, then we need a public API to
allocate the fd beforehand. Or the idea needs to be put on hold until Python
divorces itself from the C runtime's low I/O layer.
> If the file type is FILE_TYPE_CHAR and the first byte to write
> was 26 (Ctrl-Z), it's treated as success. I don't think I
> understand: it *seems* like it's handling something like writing
> to the *input* of a console, but I'm not sure it's even possible
> in this manner.
Writing to the console input buffer is possible, but not supported with
WriteFile() or WriteConsoleW(). It requires WriteConsoleInputW(), which writes
low-level input records.
ReadFile() on a console input handle is special cased to return that 0 bytes
were read if the string read from the console starts with Ctrl+Z. But I don't
know of a device that special cases WriteFile() like this. The documentation of
_write() says "[w]hen writing to a device, _write treats a CTRL+Z character in
the buffer as an output terminator". Whatever this meant in the past in OS/2 or
DOS, I doubt that it's meaningful nowadays.
> Anything else is a failure with ENOSPC. This is mysterious too.
Possibly someone picked an error code that was good enough. Maybe it was
selected for the case of a full pipe that's in non-blocking mode. The named
pipe device doesn't fail an NtWriteFile() system call for a non-blocking pipe
when there isn't enough space. It simply succeeds with 0 bytes written. For
example:
>>> fdr, fdw = os.pipe()
>>> hw = msvcrt.get_osfhandle(fdw)
>>> win32pipe.SetNamedPipeHandleState(hw, 1, None, None)
>>> os.write(fdw, b'a'*4096)
4096
>>> os.write(fdw, b'a')
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
OSError: [Errno 28] No space left on device
A POSIX developer would expect this case to fail with EAGAIN and raise
BlockingIOError. But support for non-blocking mode is poorly implemented by
pipes in Windows. Developers are encouraged to use asynchronous I/O instead.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue42606>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
