Christian Heimes wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
Let's not think too Unix-specific. If we add such an API it should do
something on Windows too -- the app shouldn't have to test for the
presence of the API. (And thus the API probably shouldn't be called
fsync.)
In my initial proposal one and a half hour earlier I suggested 'sync()'
as the name of the method and 'synced' as the name of the flag that
forces a fsync() call during the close operation.
Maybe it would make more sense for "synced" to force fsync() on each
flush, not only on close. I'm not sure how useful it is, but that's
what "synced" would imply to me. Maybe it would be best to avoid having
such a variable, and expose a close_sync() method instead?
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
