[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Christian Heimes added the comment: In C programming common names for both ends are reader and writer. We could go with the pipes analogy and call the ends inlet and outlet. -- nosy: +christian.heimes ___ Python tracker

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Changes by Ethan Furman : -- nosy: -ethan.furman ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Martin Panter added the comment: The original Python-ideas thread: If you want shorter field names, how about just r and w (as they are currently documented)? os.write(our_pipe.w, b"data") os.read(our_pipe.r, 1024) “Input” and “output” would also wor

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Ethan Furman added the comment: As for Niki's example: - --> src = os.pipe() --> src (3, 4) --> if not hasattr(src, 'read'): src = open(src) ... Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in TypeError: invalid file: (3, 4) -

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Ethan Furman added the comment: Okay, scratch the "not file descriptors" part of my comment, but the rest still stands. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Ethan Furman added the comment: Nowhere else in the stdlib is 'readfd' defined, and 'writefd' is only used once in a test. I think tacking on the 'fd' is both too low level as well as misleading since these are not file descriptors. If there is no agreement on read/write (understandable since

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: Here's a patch, please review. -- keywords: +patch stage: -> patch review Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39839/ospipe.patch ___ Python tracker

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: +1 for readfd/writefd. I think 'fd' suffix is necessary to make it explicit that those aren't file objects. -- nosy: +yselivanov ___ Python tracker __

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Jonathan Slenders added the comment: Niki Spahiev made a valid argument saying that the following code is common: if not hasattr(src, 'read'): src = open(src) This will break if we name it 'read'/'write' like the methods of a file object. -- ___ Py

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Ethan Furman added the comment: 'read'/'write' is sufficient. +1 for the proposal. -- nosy: +ethan.furman ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

Chris Angelico added the comment: Another good option is read/write without the 'fd' suffix. Either works, I'd prefer the shorter one but by a small margin. -- nosy: +Rosuav ___ Python tracker

[issue24536] os.pipe() should return a structsequence (or namedtuple.)

New submission from Jonathan Slenders: As discussed on python-ideas, os.pipe should return a structsequence instead of a plain tuple. To be decided is the naming for the read and write end. Personally, I'm in favour of using readfd/writefd. > our_pipe = pipe() > os.write(our_pipe.writefd, b'da