[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Ok, this should be fixed now. universal newlines support is still broken with communicate(), I've opened issue12623 for that. -- resolution: -> fixed stage: needs patch -> committed/rejected status: open -> closed

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 5cc536fbd7c1 by Antoine Pitrou in branch '3.2': Issue #12591: Improve support of "universal newlines" in the subprocess http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/5cc536fbd7c1 New changeset b616396fa170 by Antoine Pitrou in branch 'default': Issue #12591: Im

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 9144014028f3 by Antoine Pitrou in branch '3.2': Issue #12591: Allow io.TextIOWrapper to work with raw IO objects (without http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/9144014028f3 New changeset c3b47cdea0d1 by Antoine Pitrou in branch 'default': Issue #12591:

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: This additional patch improves universal_newlines support in subprocess (still broken with the select- and poll-based loops in communicate()). -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22732/spnewlines.patch ___ Pyt

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Amaury Forgeot d'Arc added the comment: Looks good, then. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: h

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > "write_through" is not used in _pyio.py, is it expected? Yup, because it is actually always write-through (writes are not cached). The argument is only there so that the signature is the same as the C version. --

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Amaury Forgeot d'Arc added the comment: "write_through" is not used in _pyio.py, is it expected? -- nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc ___ Python tracker ___

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Here is a first patch allowing TextIOWrapper to work with raw IO objects, and adding a "write_through" flag. -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22731/textio_rawio.patch ___ Python tracker

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Another possibility is to provide read1() on RawIO, as a synonym of read(). -- ___ Python tracker ___ _

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Hmm, one problem is that the C TextIOWrapper buffers writes. We would need an additional constructor parameter to prevent that :/ -- ___ Python tracker __

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: So, as the title indicates, I think we should make TextIOWrapper work with raw IO objects. The reason is so that write() can behave in a totally unbuffered way, which is necessary for Popen to behave appropriately. --

[issue12591] TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist

Changes by Antoine Pitrou : -- title: text files returned by subprocess.Popen with universal_newlines=True are not iterable -> TextIOWrapper should fall back on read() if read1() doesn't exist ___ Python tracker