Message126807
| Author |
nadeem.vawda |
| Recipients |
MizardX, eric.araujo, nadeem.vawda, niemeyer, pitrou, rhettinger, wrobell, xuanji |
| Date |
2011年01月22日.00:49:16 |
| SpamBayes Score |
6.635925e-11 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1295657359.57.0.620635465813.issue5863@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I have been working on a patch for this issue. I've implemented everything except for readline(), readlines() and the iterator protocol.
In the existing implementation, the reading methods seem to interact weirdly - iternext() uses a readahead buffer, while none of the other methods do. Does anyone know if there's a reason for this? I was planning on having all the reading methods use a common buffer, which should allow free mixing of read methods and iteration.
Looking at issue8397, I'm guessing it would be fine, but I wanted to double-check in case there's a quirk of the iteration protocol that I've overlooked, or something like that. |
|