[Python-Dev] HAVE_FSTAT? (original) (raw)

Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Sun May 19 14:19:04 CEST 2013

On Sun, 19 May 2013 10:08:39 +0200 Charles-François Natali <cf.natali at gmail.com> wrote:

2013/5/17 Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>: > > Hello, > > Some pieces of code are still guarded by: > #ifdef HAVEFSTAT > ... > #endif > > I would expect all systems to have fstat() these days. It's pretty > basic POSIX, and even Windows has had it for ages. Shouldn't we simply > make those code blocks unconditional? It would avoid having to maintain > unused fallback paths.

I was sure I'd seen a post/bug report about this: http://bugs.python.org/issue12082 The OP was trying to build Python on an embedded platform without fstat().

Ah, right. Ok, judging by the answers I'm being consistent in my opinions :-)

I still wonder why an embedded platform can't provide at least some emulation of fstat(), even by returning fake values. Not providing such a basic function must break a lot of existing third-party software.

Regards

Antoine.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list