[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Yury Selivanov]

Change by Yury Selivanov :


--
resolution:  -> fixed
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:


New changeset f11b460d8717fc3a5810684713b8b818f68789e8 by Yury Selivanov in 
branch 'master':
bpo-32373: Add socket.getblocking() method. (#4926)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/f11b460d8717fc3a5810684713b8b818f68789e8


--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:

It appears the the timeouts situation is a bit more complex.  It's perfectly 
normal for a Python socket object to be in a "blocking" mode and for its FD to 
be in a non-blocking mode.  Read more about this in the latest docs update to 
the PR: 
https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/4926/commits/adcc91f93e1538f0d25645ebe0285b12137a3e3b

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Andrew Svetlov]

Andrew Svetlov  added the comment:

Agree, it's a bug.

+1 for getblocking()

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Antoine Pitrou]

Antoine Pitrou  added the comment:

> Now is having a timeout and blocking send/recv methods on a non-blocking 
> socket a feature? Or is this a bug?

I agree it's a bug (but should only be fixed in 3.7).

Also I agree with adding a socket.getblocking() method.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:

It looks like we have a bug with 'sock.settimeout()' and non-blocking/blocking 
modes (or maybe this is a feature?)

Currently:

* to make a socket non-blocking, we call 'sock.settimeout(0)'.

* to make a socket blocking, we call 'sock.settimeout(None)'.


What happens if we call sock.settimeout(t), where t > 0?  The internal timeout 
field of the socket object will simply be set to 't'.  What happens if the 
socket was in a non-blocking mode?  Nothing, it stays in non-blocking mode.

What it means: suppose you have a non-blocking socket.  You call 
socket.settimeout(10), and most likely you wanted to make it blocking again.  
Because all operations on the socket become blocking from moment (sock_call_ex 
repeats on EWOULDBLOCK and EAGAIN).

Now is having a timeout and blocking send/recv methods on a non-blocking socket 
a feature? Or is this a bug?

--
nosy: +njs, pitrou

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Yury Selivanov]

Change by Yury Selivanov :


--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +4820
stage:  -> patch review

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Yury Selivanov]

Change by Yury Selivanov :


--
nosy: +asvetlov, vstinner

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue32373] Add socket.getblocking() method

[Yury Selivanov]

New submission from Yury Selivanov :

Currently we have the following methods:

* socket.settimeout(t) -- can set the socket in blocking mode, when t==0.
* socket.setblocking(flag) -- sets in blocking or non-blocking mode.
* socket.gettimeout() -- returns 0 when socket is in non-blocking mode.

socket.gettimeout() is the only easy way of checking if the socket is 
non-blocking or blocking, but it's not intuitive to use it.  It's especially 
strange that we have a setblocking() method without a corresponding 
getblocking().

I propose to add a 'socket.getblocking() -> bool' method.

--
assignee: yselivanov
components: Library (Lib)
messages: 308645
nosy: yselivanov
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Add socket.getblocking() method
type: enhancement
versions: Python 3.7

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com