[Python-3000] Draft PEP for New IO system (original) (raw)

Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Sun Mar 25 17:46:57 CEST 2007

You're not supposed to do that. I guess the PEP is unclear about that, but the effect would (as you understand) depend intricately on the internal state of the BufferedIO object, and while on the one hand I want the BufferedIO object to be more transparent than a C stdio object, on the other hand I don't want to force it into a particular implementation (I want freedom to evolve it). The PEP ought to be explicit about this. The relationship between the two is not unlike that between a C stdio object and its fileno() -- there are certain times that the relationship is well-defined (e.g. after a fsync()) and others that it is not.

--Guido

On 3/25/07, Aahz <aahz at pythoncraft.com> wrote:

I've looked at the most recent version at

http://python.org/dev/peps/pep-3116/ and I see nothing in there about the interaction between a BufferedIO object and its underlying RawIO object. That is, what happens if you do this: f = open('foo', buffering=200) f.read(150) f.raw.read(200) -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "Typing is cheap. Thinking is expensive." --Roy Smith

Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000 at python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/guido%40python.org

-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list