➜
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.
Created on 2005-11-18 00:03 by doerwalter, last changed 2022-04-11 14:56 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| StringIO.diff | doerwalter, 2005-11-18 00:03 | |||
| Messages (11) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg49054 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) *  |
Date: 2005-11-18 00:03 | |
This patch changes StringIO.StringIO.next to raise a ValueError when the stream is closed. This is the same behaviour as for cStringIO.StringIO and real files. |
|||
| msg49055 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * |
Date: 2005-11-29 16:36 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 There are other discrepancies between StringIO.StringIO and cString.StringIO: isatty() raises a ValueError() for a closed StringIO.StringIO and a closed file, but not for a closed cStringIO.StringIO. And the truncate() method when called with a negative argument raised an IOError for StringIO.StringIO and real files, but not for cStringIO.StringIO. |
|||
| msg49056 - (view) | Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * |
Date: 2006-03-15 05:31 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6380 Please check this in if you haven't already done so. I need to shed load! |
|||
| msg49057 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * |
Date: 2006-03-15 08:25 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 Checked in as r43039. What do we do with the other discrepancies. Change cStringIO for both the isatty() and the truncate() problems? |
|||
| msg49058 - (view) | Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * |
Date: 2006-03-15 17:37 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6380 Sure. |
|||
| msg49059 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * |
Date: 2006-03-15 22:14 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 Checked in a fix for cStringIO.StringIO.isatty() as r43054. |
|||
| msg49060 - (view) | Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2006-11-12 18:51 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=21627 What is the status of this patch? Is there any further action necessary? |
|||
| msg49061 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * |
Date: 2006-11-13 15:50 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 truncate() hasn't been changed yet: cStringIO.StringIO.truncate() treats a negative argument as "truncate to the current position". file.truncate() raises a "IOError: [Errno 22] Invalid argument". In this case the StringIO behaviour seems to be the preferable one. |
|||
| msg49062 - (view) | Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) * |
Date: 2006-11-13 16:46 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=849994 Well, standard C specifies to return EINVAL on negative length. I'm not sure if we should deviate from that behavior as long as files are a quite thin wrapper around standard C files. |
|||
| msg49063 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * |
Date: 2006-11-13 17:39 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 Calling file.truncate() without a argument does a "truncate to current position" so maybe StringIO should raise IOError(EINVAL) on truncate(-1) and both should truncate to the current position on truncate(None)? |
|||
| msg49064 - (view) | Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2006-11-19 10:45 | |
doerwalter: I think it should. StringIO was already behaving that way, so only cStringIO needed to distinguish between -1 and no argument (passing None isn't supported - it isn't for regular files, either). I committed this as r52788, and think that this issue can now be closed. I don't think this change should be backported, as it may break applications, for no good reason. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:56:14 | admin | set | github: 42605 |
| 2005-11-18 00:03:07 | doerwalter | create | |