This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | schmir |
|---|---|
| Recipients | CurtHagenlocher, akuchling, draghuram, pitrou, schmir |
| Date | 2008年04月15日.05:42:15 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.036821913 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1208238136.77.0.648343053408.issue2632@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
This patch handles the case where the caller has specified the size argument. When size is unspecified, it should be handled as if size was infinite. By the formula from your patch, this should be recv_size = min(self.max_readsize, max(self._rbufsize, left)) (== min(self.max_readsize, inf) == self.max_readsize) and not the current code: if self._rbufsize <= 1: recv_size = self.default_bufsize else: recv_size = self._rbufsize while True: data = self._sock.recv(recv_size) BTW, I still think this max_readsize limit should be handled somewhere deeper in the code. at least maybe in the _socketobject class. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008年04月15日 05:42:17 | schmir | set | spambayes_score: 0.0368219 -> 0.036821913 recipients: + schmir, akuchling, pitrou, draghuram, CurtHagenlocher |
| 2008年04月15日 05:42:16 | schmir | set | spambayes_score: 0.0368219 -> 0.0368219 messageid: <1208238136.77.0.648343053408.issue2632@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008年04月15日 05:42:16 | schmir | link | issue2632 messages |
| 2008年04月15日 05:42:15 | schmir | create | |