From 8480bc65bc475a8b7737dc8d23131325cd9ca02f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Martin=20v=2E=20L=C3=B6wis?= Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 10:27:56 +0200 Subject: Drop claim about nasty problem. It's unclear what this was referring to; most likely, it was about sockets that the application had already closed, in which case it's not a sockets problem, but an application problem. --- Doc/howto/sockets.rst | 6 ------ 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/Doc/howto/sockets.rst b/Doc/howto/sockets.rst index 0591e94..324ea0a 100644 --- a/Doc/howto/sockets.rst +++ b/Doc/howto/sockets.rst @@ -371,12 +371,6 @@ have created a new socket to ``connect`` to someone else, put it in the potential_writers list. If it shows up in the writable list, you have a decent chance that it has connected. -One very nasty problem with ``select``: if somewhere in those input lists of -sockets is one which has died a nasty death, the ``select`` will fail. You then -need to loop through every single damn socket in all those lists and do a -``select([sock],[],[],0)`` until you find the bad one. That timeout of 0 means -it won't take long, but it's ugly. - Actually, ``select`` can be handy even with blocking sockets. It's one way of determining whether you will block - the socket returns as readable when there's something in the buffers. However, this still doesn't help with the problem of -- cgit v0.12