[pypy-issue] [issue1097] data loss in file.write()

hm tracker at bugs.pypy.org
Mon Mar 26 01:41:56 CEST 2012

hm <hacman0 at gmail.com> added the comment:

The order of the output might be considered an implementation detail (although I'd argue that 
it isn't), but whether output is recorded at all hardly seems an implementation detail.  If 
each works on its own (which is the case), they should be expected to work together.  If the 
flush of the write is delayed until garbage collection, then the seek of the file pointer for 
proper "append" behavior should also be delayed.  Otherwise, calling open(..., 'a') is behaving 
like open(..., 'w').  That is the behavior I would call a bug.  I can understand if this is not 
an urgent item for you, as I know you are busy with other issues and making pypy even more 
awesome, but I'd urge you to reconsider "wontfix." At least answer this, then I'll leave you 
alone: if someone were to submit a patch modifying this behavior without breaking or slowing 
anything else, would you reject it?  I'm not offering at the moment, although I'd think about 
looking into what it would take at least, but take it as a rhetorical question for now.  jython, for instance, outputs all of the data, but out of order from how it is specified in the 

I read the further explanation at 
http://pypy.readthedocs.org/en/latest/cpython_differences.html and I can see the point of view 
there, but it seems wrong in the case of appends.  The following C program, for instance, 
outputs 234511111111111111111
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
    char a1[] = "11111111111111111";
    char a2[] = "2345";
    FILE *f1 = fopen("bye", "a");
    fwrite(a1, sizeof(a1[0]), sizeof(a1)-1, f1);
    FILE *f2 = fopen("bye", "a");
    fwrite(a2, sizeof(a2[0]), sizeof(a2)-1, f2);

Whether or not we agree on this particular issue, thanks for all the great work on the project!

PyPy bug tracker <tracker at bugs.pypy.org>

More information about the pypy-issue mailing list