"Gustavo Carneiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anyway, I was speaking hypothetically. I'm pretty sure writing to a > pipe is async signal safe. It is the oldest trick in the book, > everyone uses it. I don't have to see a written signed contract to > know that it works.
Ah. Well, I can assure you that it's not the oldest trick in the book, and not everyone uses it. > This is all the evidence that I need. And again I reiterate that > whether or not async safety can be achieved in practice for all > platforms is not Python's problem. I wish you the joy of trying to report a case where it doesn't work to a large vendor and get them to accept that it is a bug. > Although I believe writing to a > pipe is 100% reliable for most platforms. Even if it is not, any > mission critical application relying on signals for correct behaviour > should be rewritten to use unix sockets instead; end of argument. Er, no. There are lots of circumstances where that isn't feasible, such as wanting to close down an application cleanly when the scheduler sends it a SIGXCPU. Regards, Nick Maclaren, University of Cambridge Computing Service, New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel.: +44 1223 334761 Fax: +44 1223 334679 _______________________________________________ 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
