Josiah Carlson <josiahcarl...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
Just to make this clear, Aleksi is proposing close() should be called automatically by some higher-level functionality whether a user has overridden handle_close() or not. With the updated asyncore warning suppression stuff, overriding handle_close() for the sake of suppressing the warnings should no longer be necessary. While I can see that it would be *convenient* if close() was automatically called, the method is called "handle_close()", and there is an expectation about the implementation thereof. For example, you call socket.recv() in handle_read(), you call socket.send() in handle_write(), call socket.accept() in handle_accept(). Is it too much to expect that a user will call .close() inside handle_close()? The answer to that last question is a "no", btw. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue909005> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
