Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-06-05 Thread Hossein
Hi. My 2 cents about this: (well I'm only a noob) I had this problem; I don't know about other people's environment, but my environment's problem was that it was actually not POSIX-compliant: it didn't have other file functions as well, but anyway the `fstat` error is the FIRST error you get

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-19 Thread Charles-François Natali
2013/5/17 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net: Hello, Some pieces of code are still guarded by: #ifdef HAVE_FSTAT ... #endif I would expect all systems to have fstat() these days. It's pretty basic POSIX, and even Windows has had it for ages. Shouldn't we simply make those code blocks

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-19 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Sun, 19 May 2013 10:08:39 +0200 Charles-François Natali cf.nat...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/5/17 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net: Hello, Some pieces of code are still guarded by: #ifdef HAVE_FSTAT ... #endif I would expect all systems to have fstat() these days. It's pretty

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-19 Thread Guido van Rossum
Fake values would probably cause hard to debug problems. It's a long standing Python tradition not to offer low level APIs that the platform doesn't have. — Sent from Mailbox On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Sun, 19 May 2013 10:08:39 +0200

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-19 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Guido van Rossum gvanros...@gmail.com wrote: Fake values would probably cause hard to debug problems. It's a long standing Python tradition not to offer low level APIs that the platform doesn't have. I meant the platform, not Python. Regards Antoine.

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-19 Thread Nick Coghlan
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Guido van Rossum gvanros...@gmail.com wrote: Fake values would probably cause hard to debug problems. It's a long standing Python tradition not to offer low level APIs that the

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-19 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Mon, 20 May 2013 01:09:19 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Sun, 19 May 2013 07:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Guido van Rossum gvanros...@gmail.com wrote: Fake values would probably cause hard to debug

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-18 Thread Antonio Cavallo
I've had a quick look with grep -R HAVE_ * | egrep '[.]c:'. Modules/posixmodule.c has HAVE_UTIME_H and it might be standard libc on all posix platforms. Objects/obmalloc.c has HAVE_MMAP… but I guess that's fine given other platforms might not have such facility. Depending on the granularity

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-17 Thread Benjamin Peterson
2013/5/17 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net: Hello, Some pieces of code are still guarded by: #ifdef HAVE_FSTAT ... #endif I would expect all systems to have fstat() these days. It's pretty basic POSIX, and even Windows has had it for ages. Shouldn't we simply make those code blocks

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-17 Thread Skip Montanaro
Some pieces of code are still guarded by: #ifdef HAVE_FSTAT ... #endif Are there other guards for similarly common libc functions? If so, perhaps each one should be removed in a series of change sets, one per guard. Skip ___ Python-Dev mailing

Re: [Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT?

2013-05-17 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Fri, 17 May 2013 09:15:29 -0500 Skip Montanaro s...@pobox.com wrote: Some pieces of code are still guarded by: #ifdef HAVE_FSTAT ... #endif Are there other guards for similarly common libc functions? I don't think so. Someone should take a look though :-) Regards Antoine.