Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 02:46 pm, dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 8:28 PM, wrote: Anybody interested in working on this at a PyCon Sprint? I won't be attending the conference proper, but plan to spend a couple days sprinting, I'll be there and interested. :) Great! I plan to ho

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 8:28 PM, wrote: > Anybody interested in working on this at a PyCon Sprint? I won't be > attending the conference proper, but plan to spend a couple days sprinting, > I'll be there and interested. :) -- Daniel Stutzbach, Ph.D. President, Stutzbach Enterprises, LLC

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Glyph> I'll try to make sure we get those notes to you in advance of the Glyph> sprints :). I should be at the Twisted sprint the whole time - Glyph> will you be at the physical sprint, or following along at home? Thanks. I will be at the physical sprints. (I live in the Chicago ar

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 01:50 am, n...@arctrix.com wrote: gl...@divmod.com wrote: we're not even talking about actually putting any Twisted code into the standard library, just standardizing the "protocol" API, which basically boils down to: [...] This sounds great. I'm interested on working on this since i

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 02:28 am, s...@pobox.com wrote: Glyph> ... which is exactly why I have volunteered to explain to someone Glyph> how to separate the core event-loop bits Neil> This sounds great. Anybody interested in working on this at a PyCon Sprint? I won't be attending the conference prope

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Glyph> ... which is exactly why I have volunteered to explain to someone Glyph> how to separate the core event-loop bits (suitable for inclusion Glyph> in the standard library) from the huge pile of protocol Glyph> implementations which are not necessarily useful. Neil> This so

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

gl...@divmod.com wrote: > ... which is exactly why I have volunteered to explain to someone how to > separate the core event-loop bits (suitable for inclusion in the > standard library) from the huge pile of protocol implementations which > are not necessarily useful. > > Despite the FUD to the

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 10:01 am, greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote: Hrvoje Niksic wrote: Under Linux, select() may report a socket file descriptor as "ready for reading", while nevertheless a subsequent read blocks. Blarg. Linux is broken, then. This should not happen. You know what else

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Greg Ewing wrote: Even if you don't agree that using O_NONBLOCK with select/poll is the best approach to non-blocking, I think there is enough existing practice of doing this to warrant separate consideration of non-blocking sockets (in the OS sense) and select/poll. I'm not saying there isn'

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Hrvoje Niksic wrote: Under Linux, select() may report a socket file descriptor as "ready for reading", while nevertheless a subsequent read blocks. Blarg. Linux is broken, then. This should not happen. This could for example happen when data has arrived b

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Greg Ewing wrote: Antoine Pitrou wrote: For starters, since py3k is supposed to support non-blocking IO, why not write a portable API to make a raw file or socket IO object non-blocking? I think we need to be clearer what we mean when we talk about non-blocking in this context. Normally when

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Antoine Pitrou wrote: For starters, since py3k is supposed to support non-blocking IO, why not write a portable API to make a raw file or socket IO object non-blocking? I think we need to be clearer what we mean when we talk about non-blocking in this context. Normally when you're using select

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 3:11 PM, wrote: > > On 07:30 pm, n...@arctrix.com wrote: >> >> Chris McDonough wrote: >>> >>> As far as I can tell, asyncore/asynchat is all "undocumented >>> internals".  Any use of asyncore in anger will use internals; >>> there never was any well-understood API to these

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 07:30 pm, n...@arctrix.com wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: As far as I can tell, asyncore/asynchat is all "undocumented internals". Any use of asyncore in anger will use internals; there never was any well-understood API to these modules. The implementation requires some intricate and pla

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Greg Ewing canterbury.ac.nz> writes: > > Neil Schemenauer wrote: > > > What I would like to see is a module that provides a low-level API > > for doing cross-platform asynchronous IO. The two necessary parts > > are: > > > > * a wrapper that allows non-blocking reads and writes on > >

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Bill Janssen wrote: > Josiah Carlson wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Greg Ewing >> wrote: >> > Daniel Stutzbach wrote: >> > >> >> If you have a working select(), it will tell you the sockets on which >> >> read() and write() won't block, so non-block

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Josiah Carlson wrote: A read callback, a write callback. What about close, error, connect, and accept callbacks? Yep, all those as well. I hate to say it (not really), but that's pretty much the handle_*() methods of asyncore :/ . Well, then, what's the problem? Is there anything else pe

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Josiah Carlson wrote: > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Greg Ewing > wrote: > > Daniel Stutzbach wrote: > > > >> If you have a working select(), it will tell you the sockets on which > >> read() and write() won't block, so non-blocking reads and writes are not > >> necessary. > > > > No, but t

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Greg Ewing wrote: > Daniel Stutzbach wrote: > >> If you have a working select(), it will tell you the sockets on which >> read() and write() won't block, so non-blocking reads and writes are not >> necessary. > > No, but there should be an interface that lets you s

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Daniel Stutzbach wrote: If you have a working select(), it will tell you the sockets on which read() and write() won't block, so non-blocking reads and writes are not necessary. No, but there should be an interface that lets you say "when something comes in on this fd, call this function for

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Neil Schemenauer wrote: What I would like to see is a module that provides a low-level API for doing cross-platform asynchronous IO. The two necessary parts are: * a wrapper that allows non-blocking reads and writes on channels (sockets, file descriptors, serial ports, etc) *

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Neil Schemenauer wrote: > What I would like to see is a module that provides a low-level API > for doing cross-platform asynchronous IO. The two necessary parts > are: > >* a wrapper that allows non-blocking reads and writes on > channels (sockets, file d

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Chris McDonough wrote: > As far as I can tell, asyncore/asynchat is all "undocumented > internals". Any use of asyncore in anger will use internals; > there never was any well-understood API to these modules. What I would like to see is a module that provides a low-level API for doing cross-plat

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 4 Mar, 09:36 pm, dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com wrote: Will any or all of you be at PyCon? I'd be willing to put in the extra work to turn your notes into a PEP. I definitely will be. I'll see you there! ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 4 Mar, 08:28 pm, ba...@python.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 4, 2009, at 2:44 PM, gl...@divmod.com wrote: Maintaining compatibility with the 2.6.x version of asyncore presupposes that *someone* has written some software against that version of asyncore and

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 4 Mar, 09:14 pm, krs...@solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu wrote: I spent about a half hour sometime in the last month talking this through with Itamar, though not in great detail. I'd be interested in sitting down with both of you and trying to establish more precisely how much work is necessary to

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Chris McDonough wrote: >> Daniel Stutzbach wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> The same as always. We don't change APIs in bugfix releases. >>> >>> This questio

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Daniel Stutzbach wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Ivan Krstić > > wrote: > > I spent about a half hour sometime in the last month talking this > through with Itamar, though not in great detail. I'd be interested > in sitting down with b

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Ivan Krstić < krs...@solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu> wrote: > I spent about a half hour sometime in the last month talking this through > with Itamar, though not in great detail. I'd be interested in sitting down > with both of you and trying to establish more precisely

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Chris McDonough wrote: > Daniel Stutzbach wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >>> The same as always. We don't change APIs in bugfix releases. >>> >> >> This question is actually for the Zope folks and others who have had >> proble

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Daniel Stutzbach wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> The same as always. We don't change APIs in bugfix releases. >> > > This question is actually for the Zope folks and others who have had > problems with the 2.6 asyncore/asynchat: > > Are any of the problems

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Glyph, On Mar 4, 2009, at 12:31 AM, gl...@divmod.com wrote: If someone who has PEP-writing skills and some free time is updating asyncore to be more modern, I'd be very happy to walk that person through Twisted's API design and explain how either portions of our implementation could be lift

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > The same as always. We don't change APIs in bugfix releases. > This question is actually for the Zope folks and others who have had problems with the 2.6 asyncore/asynchat: Are any of the problems due to a change in the documented API..

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone > wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:46:28 -0800, Guido van Rossum > > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone > >> wrote: > >> [snip] > >>> > >>> So, as a disinterested party in this sp

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 4, 2009, at 2:44 PM, gl...@divmod.com wrote: Maintaining compatibility with the 2.6.x version of asyncore presupposes that *someone* has written some software against that version of asyncore and it might break if they installed an upgrade

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 06:51 pm, exar...@divmod.com wrote: On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:46:28 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: So, as a disinterested party in this specific case, I'd say revert to the pre-2.6 behavior. Sorry, but I really do think that we

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone > wrote: >> On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:46:28 -0800, Guido van Rossum >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone >>> wrote: >>> [snip] So, as a disinterested party in this specific case, I'd sa

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:54:19 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:46:28 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: [snip] So, as a disinterested party in this specif

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: > On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:46:28 -0800, Guido van Rossum > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone >> wrote: >> [snip] >>> >>> So, as a disinterested party in this specific case, I'd say revert to >>> the pre-2.6

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:46:28 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: [snip] So, as a disinterested party in this specific case, I'd say revert to the pre-2.6 behavior.  It does less harm than leaving the current behavior. Sorry, but I really

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: > - Show quoted text - > On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:21:26 -0800, Guido van Rossum > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Sidnei da Silva >> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Guido van Rossum >>> wrote: Sounds

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:21:26 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: Sounds like it's not so much the code that's future proof but the process used for evolving it. That seems to be missing

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Sidnei da Silva wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> Sounds like it's not so much the code that's future proof but the >> process used for evolving it. That seems to be missing for asyncore. >> :-( > > Turning the issue around a bit,

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Sounds like it's not so much the code that's future proof but the > process used for evolving it. That seems to be missing for asyncore. > :-( Turning the issue around a bit, has anyone considered polishing up the current fix to restore it

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:31 PM, wrote: > > On 3 Mar, 10:20 pm, gu...@python.org wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 1:17 PM,   wrote: > >>> At the very least, this might serve as a basis for an abstract API for >>> asyncore: >>> >>> >>> http://twistedmatrix.com/documents/8.2.0/api/twisted.interne

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 3 Mar, 10:20 pm, gu...@python.org wrote: On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 1:17 PM, wrote: At the very least, this might serve as a basis for an abstract API for asyncore: http://twistedmatrix.com/documents/8.2.0/api/twisted.internet.interfaces.IProtocol.html I hope we have learned from asyncor

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 1:17 PM, wrote: > > On 08:46 pm, gu...@python.org wrote: >> >> This seems to be the crux of the problem with asyncore, ever since it >> was added to the stdlib -- there's no real API, so every change >> potentially breaks something. I wish we could start over with a proper

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: >> How is anybody supposed to >> write a package which sits atop a library like asyncore in a fashion >> portable across Python versions? The changes to the implementation

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On 08:46 pm, gu...@python.org wrote: This seems to be the crux of the problem with asyncore, ever since it was added to the stdlib -- there's no real API, so every change potentially breaks something. I wish we could start over with a proper design under a new name. Might I suggest "reactor"..

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > How is anybody supposed to > write a package which sits atop a library like asyncore in a fashion > portable across Python versions?  The changes to the implementation in > 2.6 (there is no real API) can't be reconciled, AFAICT. This seems to

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tres Seaver wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Bill Janssen wrote: >>> Josiah Carlson wrote: >>> But yes, zope needs to be changed to reflect the updated asyncore/asynchat semantics. Trust me; it's faster,

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> But yes, zope needs to be changed to reflect the updated >>> asyncore/asynchat semantics. Trust me; i

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> But yes, zope needs to be changed to reflect the updated >> asyncore/asynchat semantics. Trust me; it's faster, cleaner, and >> easier to use now. > > Just for completeness, I b

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But yes, zope needs to be changed to reflect the updated > asyncore/asynchat semantics. Trust me; it's faster, cleaner, and > easier to use now. Just for completeness, I built a fresh 2.6, installed Medusa (from http://www.amk.ca/python/code/medusa.htm

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Sidnei da Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Great to know. So medusa should be changed similarly to the changes > made to asynchat? Hmmm. Been a long time since a Medusa release, but I need a working Medusa, too. > Your suggestion on the bugtracker is even better: to > subclass asynchat as muc

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ac_out_buffer was removed because it is unneeded (we have a deque; why > rely on an extra attribute?). > ac_out_buffer_size still remains as a blocksize in which to pre-split > outgoing data (if you have a 100k string you w

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sidnei da Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/zope2/+bug/280020 > > I think there are real issues here with both asynchat and Medusa. > Asynchat has been heavily re-written, and the "ac_out_

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

Sidnei da Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/zope2/+bug/280020 I think there are real issues here with both asynchat and Medusa. Asynchat has been heavily re-written, and the "ac_out_buffer" has apparently disappeared. But "ac_out_buffer_size" is still there. Tha

[Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

I am working on getting Zope to run (or at least, start) with Python 2.6. It actually starts right now after applying some patches, which is amazing on itself, but it dies right away due to changes in asyncore that break Zope's internal version of medusa. I've opened a bug against Zope on Launchpa