RetroSearch Browse

Tue Nov 21 12:51:15 CET 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-November/069996.html

Hi Martin,

On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 06:56:20AM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> Right: socket._fileobject will invoke recv as many times as
> necessary to read the requested amount of data. I was somehow
> assuming that it maps read() to read(2), which, in turn, would
> directly map to recv(2), which could return less data.
> 
> So it's a semantic change only for the last block.

That means that it would be rather pointless to make the change, right?
The original poster's motivation is to get accurate progress during the
transfer - but he missed that he already gets that.

The proposed change only appears to be relevant together with a
hypothetical rewrite of the underlying code, one that would use recv()
instead of read().

A bientot,

Armin

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-November/069996.html below:

[Python-Dev] Passing actual read size to urllib reporthook