Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/21/06, *Nick Coghlan* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > Delaney, Timothy (Tim) wrote: > > Looks like there's a bug in Popen.__del__ in 2.5. I'm not in a > position > > to have a look right now. > > For those not watching python-checkins, a check for "is not None" > has been > added before the offending line in Popen.__del__. (by Georg, IIRC) > > > Many thanks for accepting my patch. There remains a potentially related > problem in popen2.py, but it may be a lower priority, since most folks > should be using subprocess. > > def __del__(self): > # In case the child hasn't been waited on, check if it's done. > self.poll(_deadstate=sys.maxint) > if self.sts < 0: > if _active: > # Child is still running, keep us alive until we can > wait on it. > _active.append(self) > > > The is _active check, unless it intendeds to check for either empty or > None, should probably be revised to: > > def __del__(self): > # In case the child hasn't been waited on, check if it's done. > self.poll(_deadstate=sys.maxint) > if self.sts < 0: > if _active is None: > # Child is still running, keep us alive until we can > wait on it. > _active.append(self) > > However, there may be a clever reason for doing what is doing that I do > not see.
There's no reason (I know since I added the check myself ;). Thanks for pointing out that obvious bug. (fixed in rev 50759). Georg _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
