Message161130
| Author | hynek |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Arfrever, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, hynek, jcea, mrts, neologix, petri.lehtinen, pitrou, rosslagerwall, schmir, tarek, teamnoir |
| Date | 2012-05-19.15:28:04 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1337441285.7.0.22110383684.issue4489@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
I'm taking Charles-François' review comments here. > 1. since fwalk() uses O(depth directory tree) file descriptors, we might run out > of FD on really deep directory hierarchies. It shouldn't be a problem in > practise Should I mention it in the docs? The old one uses recursion and we don't warn about the stack too... > 2. there is a slight API change, since the API exposes the function that > triggered the failure. I don't think there's a lot a of code that depends on > this, but it's definitely a change I was pondering whether I should "fake" the method names as they pretty much map: listdir instead of fwalk and unlink instead of unlink at… what do you all think about that? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2012-05-19 15:28:05 | hynek | set | recipients: + hynek, georg.brandl, jcea, pitrou, schmir, tarek, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, Arfrever, mrts, neologix, teamnoir, rosslagerwall, petri.lehtinen |
| 2012-05-19 15:28:05 | hynek | set | messageid: <1337441285.7.0.22110383684.issue4489@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2012-05-19 15:28:05 | hynek | link | issue4489 messages |
| 2012-05-19 15:28:04 | hynek | create | |