David Cuthbert added the comment:
On the completely deprecate reuse_address and rewrite/force folks to use
reuse_port proposals, I'm a bit dubious of this approach.
Right now, we have two knobs that directly correspond to (potential)
kernel-level socket parameters, SO_REUSEADD
David Cuthbert added the comment:
Jukka -- Fair enough; will reword this a bit. I'm trying to keep the
DeprecationWarning short enough so people's eyes don't glaze over; will see
what wordsmithing I can do here. (Once you get beyond a certain length, the
number of folks wh
David Cuthbert added the comment:
Alright -- my first stab at the DeprecationWarning in 3.6.
https://github.com/dacut/cpython/commit/6a1e261678975e2c70ec6b5e98e8affa28702312
Please critique away, and don't fret about bruising my ego. :-)
Is there a more idiomatic way of getting a warni
David Cuthbert added the comment:
FreeBSD 12.1 and MacOS 10.15.1 (Catalina) appear to have saner and safer
behavior.
Both require the use of SO_REUSEPORT for this behavior to happen as well.
FreeBSD also requires the UID to be the same or 0 for subsequent processes to
make the bind() call
David Cuthbert added the comment:
I'm working on patches for the deprecation bits (targeting 3.6 for now; will
work my way up from there) for review, including documentation. Unless someone
tells me to stop. :-)
In an attempt to make this not-so-Linux-specific, I'm reviewing how
David Cuthbert added the comment:
How much harm would there be in bringing the DeprecationWarning into the next
patch of existing (3.6, 3.7, 3.8) releases? The security implications are
significant enough that I'd want to be notified of it in my software ASAP.
Users can (and s
Change by David Cuthbert :
--
versions: +Python 3.8
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue34820>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
David Cuthbert added the comment:
I'm seeing this on a rebuild now of Python 3.7.4 on Ubuntu 18.04 (in my case
against _ssl.c).
What's happening is there's coverage/profiling data being generated in the
build chain (somewhere), which spits out files named *.gcda. Interesting
David Cuthbert added the comment:
Oops, I wasn't looking broadly enough. This is also used in the augmented
assignment statements syntax, e.g. a += 1, 2, 3
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/is
David Cuthbert added the comment:
Hm... that leaves the only production for expression_list as:
subscription ::= primary "[" expression_list "]"
And I'm not sure that this shouldn't also be replaced by starred_list. It's not
accepted today, though:
In [6]
David Cuthbert added the comment:
CLA processed, and BDFL has assented on python-dev. Serhiy, thoughts on next
steps?
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue32
Change by David Cuthbert :
--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +4446
stage: -> patch review
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue32117>
___
___
Py
New submission from David Cuthbert :
This stems from a query on StackOverflow:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47272460/python-tuple-unpacking-in-return-statement/
Specifically, the following syntax is allowed:
def f():
rest = (4, 5, 6)
t = 1, 2, 3, *rest
While the following
13 matches
Mail list logo
