R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> added the comment: On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 at 13:14, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Antoine Pitrou <pit...@free.fr> added the comment: > > RDM, all the classes you mentioned should indeed be able to do "short > reads" on pipes, sockets and the like. That's how they are tested in > test_io.py: against mock raw i/o classes which only return a few bytes > at a time (e.g. only 5 bytes will be filled in a 4096-byte buffer).
My questions in the last comment were directed at trying to clarify the documentation. I think my most important point there is whether or not 'read1' should be added to the BufferedIOBase ABI. I believe it should be, since if a class derived from BufferedIOBase does not implement it and is passed to TextIOWrapper, it will fail. > However, I encourage you once again to *experiment* with the 3.x i.o > library and share your results with us. This is the best way for us to > know whether common use cases are really covered. As I said, I plan to do so. I needed to understand the intent first, though, and reading the docs resulted in some doc questions. Should I be opening each point in a separate issue and/or providing a suggested doc patch? I'm new to trying to help out via the tracker, so best practice pointers are welcome. --RDM _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue5323> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
