Message 119824 - Python tracker

➜

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	pitrou
Recipients	alex, amaury.forgeotdarc, benjamin.peterson, brett.cannon, brian.curtin, exarkun, giampaolo.rodola, lemburg, pitrou
Date	2010-10-28.23:15:31
SpamBayes Score	0.00011449412
Marked as misclassified	No
Message-id	<1288307733.86.0.779989564751.issue10093@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
I would need opinions on one more thing. The current patch warns when a socket has not been explicitly closed. But it does so even when the socket isn't bound at all. e.g.: $ ./python -c "import socket; socket.socket()" -c:1: ResourceWarning: unclosed <socket.socket object, fd=3, family=2, type=1, proto=0> Perhaps we should be more discriminate and only warn when either bind(), listen() or connect() had been called previously? What do you think?

I would need opinions on one more thing. The current patch warns when a socket has not been explicitly closed. But it does so even when the socket isn't bound at all. e.g.:

$ ./python -c "import socket; socket.socket()"
-c:1: ResourceWarning: unclosed <socket.socket object, fd=3, family=2, type=1, proto=0>

Perhaps we should be more discriminate and only warn when either bind(), listen() or connect() had been called previously? What do you think?

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2010-10-28 23:15:34	pitrou	set	recipients: + pitrou, lemburg, brett.cannon, exarkun, amaury.forgeotdarc, giampaolo.rodola, benjamin.peterson, alex, brian.curtin
2010-10-28 23:15:33	pitrou	set	messageid: <1288307733.86.0.779989564751.issue10093@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2010-10-28 23:15:32	pitrou	link	issue10093 messages
2010-10-28 23:15:32	pitrou	create