Florent Viard added the comment:
Come on, please stop trying to close the issue so fast without deeply thinking
about it.
A lot of years without a "detailed" bug report indicating the root cause is not
a "proof" that there is no bug. Otherwise, you can say that there is no
Florent Viard added the comment:
Sorry, typo in my last sentence:
"I would have agreed with your point if the problem was NOT solvable,..."
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.o
Florent Viard added the comment:
Sorry to reply after a so long time.
Please don't close this issue too fast, there is really a big issue that is not
related to my specific case.
(Note that the attached test case is not the real case, but a small piece of
code that is able to reproduc
Florent Viard added the comment:
I understand that it should have been the reason of this.
But in my opinion, it is very bad to possibly have calculations and user space
arbitrary operations inside the logging lock.
If you look at my proposition, you can do the format after the filter, but
Florent Viard added the comment:
Looking at the code, this issue makes sense
in logging/__init__.py (+738):
def handle(self, record):
"""
Conditionally emit the specified logging record.
Emission depends on filters which may have been added
New submission from Florent Viard:
When an user, use logging, to try to display an object that uses some threading
locks, there could be a race condition and the logging module will deadlock.
So, any thread that will try to use logging, will then be stuck forever.
Please see the following
Florent Viard added the comment:
R. David, what you say is correct, supporting "select" that would be nice but
i'm also not sure that is supposed to, and in that case, maybe select as to be
fixed for that.
But:
a) As urllib2 through httplib provide publicly a fileno, i was
Florent Viard added the comment:
Thank you for your reply.
But I just realised that in my bug issue, I completely forgot to indicate what
is "req" and so this is maybe the root of you telling me that the best is to
fix the client code side as the traceback could be confusing.
This
Florent Viard added the comment:
Hi Terry,
I think you misunderstood what i was trying to say.
Maybe fileno should raise a ValueError (and not -1) in that case. That is the
question. It should only be able to be something understood by "select.select".
But currently it is an Bug/Cr
New submission from Florent Viard:
In Lib/http/client.py +682(Formerly httplib)
def fileno(self):
return self.fp.fileno()
This function should be modified to be able to handle the case where the http
request is already completed and so "fp" is closed. Ex.:
def f
Florent Viard added the comment:
Hi,
I encountered the same regression with python 2.7.
I added a new testcase (testcase2) with another effect of the same problem. It
is a model of what does python-storm when I try to do:
for item in TableA.findall():
TableB.new_item(name=item.name
11 matches
Mail list logo
