[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2009-03-05 Thread Sever Băneșiu
Sever Băneșiu banesiu.se...@gmail.com added the comment: Looks like the test covering the pre-flush condition is missing. ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue4263 ___

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2009-03-05 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment: 2009/3/5 Sever Băneșiu rep...@bugs.python.org: Sever Băneșiu banesiu.se...@gmail.com added the comment: Looks like the test covering the pre-flush condition is missing. That test is no longer applicable because max_buffer_size is

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2009-03-04 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment: This has been fixed in io-c branch. (r70152) -- resolution: - fixed status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue4263

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2009-02-28 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment: This has been cured in the io-c branch. -- nosy: +benjamin.peterson ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue4263 ___

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2009-01-07 Thread Sever Băneșiu
Sever Băneșiu banesiu.se...@gmail.com added the comment: Anyway :) Practically, the test does work on both py3k and another implementation, so I don't see any urgency to remove anything from it. Indeed, it doesn't hurt keeping it. For completeness' sake I've updated your tests to cover the

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-12-31 Thread Sever Băneșiu
Sever Băneșiu banesiu.se...@gmail.com added the comment: Thanks for the new implementation of MockNonBlockWriterIO class. It makes tests so much easier to read. There are some minor things in your patch that I would change. For example: # 1 byte will be written, the rest will be buffered

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-12-31 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: The comment is misleading because in fact no byte is written at raw level. That's because the data size is smaller than the buffer size and the buffer is empty (was emptied by the last write call). It depends on the implementation. A different

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-12-31 Thread Sever Băneșiu
Sever Băneșiu banesiu.se...@gmail.com added the comment: The comment is misleading because in fact no byte is written at raw level. That's because the data size is smaller than the buffer size and the buffer is empty (was emptied by the last write call). It depends on the implementation. A

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-12-31 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: I feel that no matter what implementation algorithm BufferedWriter uses it shouldn't write smaller chunks of data than buffer's size or else the buffer is useless. If you rewrite the above sentence using the word statistically, then I can

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-12-30 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: The tests should be written so as not to rely on internal implementation details (the _write_buf attribute). -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue4263

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-12-30 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: Here is a patch which replaces testWriteNonBlocking with a reasonable implementation-independent test (it works with e.g. the io-c sandbox). The new test also checks for the current problem, i.e. it passes with the fix to io.py and fails without.

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-12-07 Thread Sever Băneșiu
Sever Băneșiu [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment: Christian, if the patch looks good to you I think now it's a good time to commit it. ___ Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.python.org/issue4263 ___

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-11-06 Thread Amaury Forgeot d'Arc
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment: The patch is good. I was first surprised by the fact that e.characters_written is not used in the write() method; but _flush_unlocked() already adjusts the _write_buf according to the original e.characters_written raised by the

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-11-06 Thread Banesiu Sever
Banesiu Sever [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment: Thanks for your review, here's a new patch. I've added a new test for the pre-flush condition and made the comments less cryptic. Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11953/bw_overage2.diff ___ Python

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-11-06 Thread Christian Heimes
Christian Heimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment: We have discussed this bug in the python developer chat yesterday. I decided to wait until after the 3.0.0 release. The problem is not critical enough for 3.0.0. I like to keep the amount of changes during the RC phase to a minimum.

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-11-06 Thread Amaury Forgeot d'Arc
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment: I do concur with the desire to restrict changes during RC phase. Do this also mean that merges from trunk will be reduced to the strict minimum? No global merge, only on a revision basis after review. In this case we could apply the

[issue4263] BufferedWriter non-blocking overage

2008-11-05 Thread Banesiu Sever
New submission from Banesiu Sever [EMAIL PROTECTED]: In some corner cases io.BufferedWriter raises an io.BlockingIOError lying about the number of characters written. I've added some tests and a small change to fix this issue. -- components: Library (Lib) files: bw_overage.diff