Mailman 3 December 2018 - docs

[issue35446] incorrect example
by Alistsair Lenhard 12 Dec '18

12 Dec '18

New submission from Alistsair Lenhard <alistair.lenhard(a)googlemail.com>: under: https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/errors.html Original it says: "Note that if the except clauses were reversed (with except B first), it would have printed B, B, B — the first matching except clause is triggered." It should read: "Note that if the except clauses were reversed (with except B first), it would have printed D, D, D — the first matching except clause is triggered." As D is the first expression in the print statement. So if the expression is changed to "except B:" class B(Exception): pass class C(B): pass class D(C): pass for cls in [B, C, D]: try: raise cls() except B: print("D") except C: print("C") except B: print("B") Result is: D D D ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 331428 nosy: Alistair, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: incorrect example versions: Python 3.7 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue35446> _______________________________________

4 4

bug report, dividing a number by 100 and adding 1
by luca-niederstadt＠web.de 12 Dec '18

12 Dec '18

2 1

[issue34172] multiprocessing.Pool and ThreadPool leak resources after being deleted
by STINNER Victor 11 Dec '18

11 Dec '18

STINNER Victor <vstinner(a)redhat.com> added the comment: I started a thread on python-dev to discuss these issues: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2018-December/155946.html ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34172> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue31823] Opaque default value for close_fds argument in Popen.__init__
by Gregory P. Smith 11 Dec '18

11 Dec '18

Gregory P. Smith <greg(a)krypto.org> added the comment: In 3.6 this help(subprocess.Popen.__init__) is accurate and encourages looking at the docs. In 3.7 and later it'll simply report close_fds=True in the siguature as that is the case in 3.7 onwards. I see nothing to fix here. ---------- nosy: +gregory.p.smith resolution: -> wont fix stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue31823> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue31823] Opaque default value for close_fds argument in Popen.__init__
by Gregory P. Smith 11 Dec '18

11 Dec '18

Change by Gregory P. Smith <greg(a)krypto.org>: ---------- versions: -Python 3.6 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue31823> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue31823] Opaque default value for close_fds argument in Popen.__init__
by Danish Prakash 08 Dec '18

08 Dec '18

Change by Danish Prakash <grafitykoncept(a)gmail.com>: ---------- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +10276 stage: -> patch review _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue31823> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue34172] multiprocessing.Pool and ThreadPool leak resources after being deleted
by STINNER Victor 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

STINNER Victor <vstinner(a)redhat.com> added the comment: See also bpo-35424: "multiprocessing.Pool: emit ResourceWarning". I wrote 10986 to fix 2 tests which leak resources. I have a question. Why do tests have to call "pool.join()" after "with pool:"? When I use a file, I know that the resources are released after "with file:". Should Pool.__exit__() call Pool.join()? This question reminds me my fix in socketserver (bpo-31151 and bpo-31233) which leaked processes and threads, and my bug bpo-34037 (asyncio leaks threads). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34172> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue34172] multiprocessing.Pool and ThreadPool leak resources after being deleted
by Antoine Pitrou 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

Antoine Pitrou <pitrou(a)free.fr> added the comment: I agree that reverting in bugfix branches was the right thing to do. I think the fix should have remained in master, though. ---------- stage: patch review -> versions: -Python 2.7, Python 3.6, Python 3.7 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34172> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue34172] multiprocessing.Pool and ThreadPool leak resources after being deleted
by STINNER Victor 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

STINNER Victor <vstinner(a)redhat.com> added the comment: I reverted the change in 2.7, 3.6, 3.7 and master branches because it introduces a regression and we are very close to a release: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2018-December/155920.html I don't want to have the pressure to push a quick fix. I would like to make sure that we have enough time to design a proper fix. I'm not saying that Pablo's fix is not correct, it's just bad timing. This bug is likely here for a long time, so I think that it's ok to still have it in the next 3.6 and 3.7 bugfix releases. I suggest to open a discussion on the python-dev mailing list about multiprocessing relying on the garbage collector and lifetime of multiprocessing objects (Pool, Process, result, etc.). It seems like I disagree with Pablo and tzickel, whereas Armin Rigo (PyPy which has a different GC) is more on my side (release explicitly resources) :-) I would prefer to move towards explicit resource managment instead of relying on destructors and the garbage collector. For example, it's a bad practice to rely on these when using PyPy. See my previous comments about issues related to multiprocessing objects lifetime. ---------- priority: release blocker -> _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34172> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue34172] multiprocessing.Pool and ThreadPool leak resources after being deleted
by STINNER Victor 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

STINNER Victor <vstinner(a)redhat.com> added the comment: New changeset 9dfc754d61c55a526304e10a328bad448efa9ee9 by Victor Stinner in branch 'master': Revert "bpo-34172: multiprocessing.Pool leaks resources after being deleted (GH-8450)" (GH-10971) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/9dfc754d61c55a526304e10a328bad448e… ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34172> _______________________________________

1 0