[issue19051] Unify buffered readers

[Martin Panter]

Martin Panter added the comment:

For what it’s worth, it would be better if compressed streams did limit the amount of data they decompressed, so that they are not susceptible to decompression bombs; see Issue 15955. But having a flexible-sized buffer could be useful in other cases.

I haven’t looked closely at the code, but I wonder if there is much difference from the existing BufferedReader. Perhaps just that the underlying raw stream in this case can deliver data in arbitrary-sized chunks, but BufferedReader expects its raw stream to deliver data in limited-sized chunks?

If you exposed the buffer it could be useful to do many things more efficiently:

* readline() with custom newline or end-of-record codes, solving Issue 1152248, Issue 17083
* scan the buffer using string operations or regular expressions etc, e.g. to skip whitespace, read a run of unescaped symbols
* tentatively read data to see if a keyword is present, but roll back if the data doesn’t match the keyword

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue19051>
_______________________________________