2006/2/2, Jim Gallacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If we are going to do a 3.2.7, let's just do it. Either spend a couple
> of days debating the merits of 3.2.7 or a couple of days *testing* it. :)
>
> My list for 3.2.7
> connection handler fix so it passes the unit tests
I'll let you pros do that :
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
We should also agree that if we do do a 3.2.7 what will be fixed in it
and this time set a strict time frame on how long we let it be tested.
Do we leave it at stat.ST_MTIME, or also add the connection handler
fix as well if we are happy with that? Is a "b" designation neede
On 02/02/2006, at 5:54 PM, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Having read your work on Vampire (and its
module importing mechanism) I'm pretty sure it won't be long.
The new importer is actually a complete rewrite and some things
are done quite differently to what was done in Vampire. I have in
effect rew
2006/2/2, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Nicolas Lehuen wrote ..
> > 2006/2/2, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > The only
> > > > problem is that apache.import_module is still as crappy as ever and
> > > > that we don't have any grand unified theory of module importing that
> >
Nicolas Lehuen wrote ..
> 2006/2/2, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > The only
> > > problem is that apache.import_module is still as crappy as ever and
> > > that we don't have any grand unified theory of module importing that
> > > would support both handlers and published modules.
> >
Nicolas Lehuen wrote ..
> OK, I've changed cache.py so that it uses stat() then open() the file
> if it needs to be reloaded. I've also added a unit test that makes
> sure the module cache is behaving as expected.
>
> Graham, I don't think the stat() / open() / fstat() sequence is
> required. How
2006/2/2, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > The only
> > problem is that apache.import_module is still as crappy as ever and
> > that we don't have any grand unified theory of module importing that
> > would support both handlers and published modules.
>
> Actually I do believe I have a gra
OK, I've changed cache.py so that it uses stat() then open() the file
if it needs to be reloaded. I've also added a unit test that makes
sure the module cache is behaving as expected.
Graham, I don't think the stat() / open() / fstat() sequence is
required. How would that improve accuracy ?
Regar
Nicolas Lehuen wrote ..
> 2006/2/2, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Note that up until now I hadn't even looked over how this new module
> > importer was implemented. I knew it wasn't going to solve various of
> the
> > existing module importer problems and I knew it was actually going to
2006/2/2, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Nicolas Lehuen wrote ..
> > Well, I thought that if the file was modified, we needed to open it
> > anyway, but you're right, that's optimising for a minority case. We
> > might as well use stat and open the file only if it has changed.
> >
> > I've
Nicolas Lehuen wrote ..
> Well, I thought that if the file was modified, we needed to open it
> anyway, but you're right, that's optimising for a minority case. We
> might as well use stat and open the file only if it has changed.
>
> I've wrote an alternative publisher a few months ago that overl
Graham Dumpleton wrote ..
> Okay, false alarm (I think). Have got myself worked up over nothing.
> I missed something very important:
>
> timestamp = fstat(opened.fileno())[-2]
>
> That is the '[-2]' in the above.
>
> I feel like a goose now.
Now for some explaination of why my brain turned o
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Okay, false alarm (I think). Have got myself worked up over nothing.
I missed something very important:
timestamp = fstat(opened.fileno())[-2]
That is the '[-2]' in the above.
I feel like a goose now.
You shouldn't as you've uncovered a potential bug. According the
2006/2/2, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Note that up until now I hadn't even looked over how this new module
> importer was implemented. I knew it wasn't going to solve various of the
> existing module importer problems and I knew it was actually going to
> introduce some new issues that
2006/2/2, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Okay, false alarm (I think). Have got myself worked up over nothing.
> I missed something very important:
>
> timestamp = fstat(opened.fileno())[-2]
>
> That is the '[-2]' in the above.
>
> I feel like a goose now.
>
> I still though question why
Okay, false alarm (I think). Have got myself worked up over nothing.
I missed something very important:
timestamp = fstat(opened.fileno())[-2]
That is the '[-2]' in the above.
I feel like a goose now.
I still though question why file/fstat is done and not stat/file though.
Ie., why open the f
16 matches
Mail list logo
