[issue1488934] file.write + closed pipe = no error
Erik Demaine edema...@mit.edu added the comment: msg28537 shows a version with flush, and says that it fails. I haven't tested since 2006, though, so I can retry, in particular to see whether the patch suggested in the original post has been applied now. -- resolution: invalid - status: closed - open ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue1488934 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue1488934] file.write + closed pipe = no error
Erik Demaine edema...@mit.edu added the comment: I just tested on Python 2.5.2, 2.6.2, and 3.0.1, and I could not reproduce the error (using the code in msg28537). It would seem that file.flush is catching the problem, even though file.write is ignoring the error, but I can't see any changes since 1.5.2 that would have changed this behavior of file.flush. So I'm not sure what happened, but at least it seems to no longer be a bug. Closing. -- status: pending - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue1488934 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue444582] Finding programs in PATH, addition to os
Erik Demaine edema...@mit.edu added the comment: As mentioned in the original request, there are at least two motivations for which functionality that are distinct from running the program (these days, with the subprocess module). #1 was detecting existence of a program. #2 was finding the *second* instance of a program on the path. After 9 years, I'm certainly not holding my breath... -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue444582 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
