Message117072
| Author |
pitrou |
| Recipients |
akuchling, brian.curtin, exarkun, neologix, pitrou, schmir, trent |
| Date |
2010年09月21日.15:40:58 |
| SpamBayes Score |
1.0438309e-05 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1285083660.8.0.846828951615.issue2643@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
It's a pity that flush() is defined like this. Ideally, if mmap claims to mimick ordinary file objects, flush() should be a no-op() and there should be a separate sync() method.
On the other hand, your (Charles-François's) patch is already much better than the statu quo.
If nobody objects, I think it should be committed to 3.2. Whether or not we should be backport it to the stable branches is a bit more delicate, since it /could/ break badly written applications...
On a sidenote, the mmap object has received a *lot* less attention during the years than the other IO primitives (especially file objects in 3.x). It should probably only be used for specialized cases. |
|