On Fri, Aug 11, 2000 at 07:55:29AM -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I just noticed this. Is this true? Shouldn't we change send() to > raise an error instead of returning a small number? (The number of > bytes written can be an attribute of the exception.) This would break a lot of code. (probably all that use send, with or without return-code checking.) I would propose a 'send_all' or some such instead, which would keep sending until either a real error occurs, or all data is sent (possibly with a timeout ?). And most uses of send could be replaced by send_all, both in the std. library and in user code. -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4