Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> added the comment: As soon as some bytes are signalled as being available one can simply do a normal get(). I don't really see the problem here? Sure, the get() might not be completely non-blocking (especially if the transferred event is more than the size of a pipe-buffer) but I have a hard time seing that as a problem as that should be both rare and only last a short time.
My personal use-case is being able to efficiently wait for evens from different queues - using the standard api one currently can only do that by busy looping... The biggest thing I see where you have to be careful here is some stomping herd phenomenon you will get into if you have multiple readers doing a poll(). Namely *all* off those processes will awake and run into .get() which isnt exactly nice, but thats hardly solvable on python level. ---------- nosy: +andresfreund _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3831> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
