On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> Anyway, as for concrete requirements: The issue I have always seen with
>> various asynchronous libraries is their lack of composability. Everyone
>> writes their own application loop and event queue. Merely having a standard
>> spec
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:13 AM, Kristján Valur Jónsson
wrote:
> I'm sorry, I thought it was something that people did more often, to create
> different implementations of of the "socket" api, for which cPython provided
> a mere reference implementation. I know of at least three different
> al
Le Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:13:15 +,
Kristján Valur Jónsson a écrit :
> I'm sorry, I thought it was something that people did more often, to
> create different implementations of of the "socket" api, for which
> cPython provided a mere reference implementation. I know of at least
> three different
I'm sorry, I thought it was something that people did more often, to create
different implementations of of the "socket" api, for which cPython provided a
mere reference implementation. I know of at least three different alternative
implementations, so I thought that the question were clear eno
gvanros...@gmail.com] On Behalf
>> Of Guido van Rossum
>> Sent: 26. nóvember 2012 15:59
>> To: Kristján Valur Jónsson
>> Cc: Python-Dev (python-dev@python.org)
>> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Socket timeout and completion based sockets
>>
>> If you're talki
On 27/11/2012 9:35am, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
This worries me:
"If the file handle is associated with a completion port, an I/O completion
> packet is not queued to the port if a synchronous operation is
successfully canceled...
I think you can only abort a synchronous operation if you u
Valur Jónsson
> Cc: Python-Dev (python-dev@python.org)
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Socket timeout and completion based sockets
>
> If you're talking about the standard socket module, I'm not aware that it uses
> IOCP on Windows. Are you asking this just in the abstract, or
rk
> Sent: 26. nóvember 2012 16:05
> To: python-dev@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Socket timeout and completion based sockets
>
> On 26/11/2012 11:49am, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
> > However, other implementations of python sockets, e.g. ones that rely
> >
On Nov 26, 2012, at 11:05 AM, Richard Oudkerk wrote:
> Using CancelIo()/CancelIoEx() to abort an operation started with WSARecv()
> does not seem to cause a problem
(emphasis mine)
Little command-line experiments are not the right way to verify the behavior of
high-performance I/O APIs. You
On 26/11/2012 11:49am, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
However, other implementations of python sockets, e.g. ones that rely on
IO completion, may not have the luxury of using select. For example, on
Windows, there is no way to abort an IOCP socket call, so a timeout must
be implemented by abortin
If you're talking about the standard socket module, I'm not aware that
it uses IOCP on Windows. Are you asking this just in the abstract, or
do you know of a Python implementation that uses IOCP to implement the
standard socket type?
As to the design of the async I/O library (which I am still work
Regarding the recent discussion on python-ideas about asyncronous IO, I'd like
to ask a question about python socket's Timeout feature.
Specifically this: Is it a documented or a guaranteed feature that a
send/receive operation that times out with a socket.timeout error is
re-startable on that
12 matches
Mail list logo
