Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #9485
| References | <ivnh2f$rdc$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
|---|---|
| From | Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> |
| Date | 2011-07-14 14:00 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Possible File iteration bug |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.1035.1310673638.1164.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Billy Mays <noway@nohow.com> wrote:
> def getLines(f):
> lines = []
> for line in f:
> lines.append(line)
> return lines
>
> with open('/var/log/syslog', 'rb') as f:
> lines = getLines(f)
> # do some processing with lines
> # /var/log/syslog gets updated in the mean time
>
> # always returns an empty list, even though f has more data
> lines = getLines(f)
>
>
>
>
> I found a workaround by adding f.seek(0,1) directly before the last
> getLines() call, but is this the expected behavior? Calling f.tell() right
> after the first getLines() call shows that it isn't reset back to 0. Is
> this correct or a bug?
This is expected. Part of the iterator protocol is that once an
iterator raises StopIteration, it should continue to raise
StopIteration on subsequent next() calls.
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Possible File iteration bug Billy Mays <noway@nohow.com> - 2011-07-14 15:46 -0400
Re: Possible File iteration bug Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 14:00 -0600
Re: Possible File iteration bug Billy Mays <noway@nohow.com> - 2011-07-14 16:15 -0400
Re: Possible File iteration bug Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@xemacs.org> - 2011-07-14 22:39 +0200
Re: Possible File iteration bug Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-07-14 16:43 -0400
Re: Possible File iteration bug "bruno.desthuilliers@gmail.com" <bruno.desthuilliers@gmail.com> - 2011-07-15 01:01 -0700
Re: Possible File iteration bug Billy Mays <noway@nohow.com> - 2011-07-15 08:26 -0400
Re: Possible File iteration bug Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-07-15 16:21 +0200
Re: Possible File iteration bug Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-07-15 17:45 -0400
Re: Possible File iteration bug Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-07-16 13:42 +1000
Re: Possible File iteration bug Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-07-16 14:07 +1000
Re: Possible File iteration bug Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2011-07-17 09:28 +1000
Re: Possible File iteration bug Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-07-17 09:26 +0200
Re: Possible File iteration bug Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-07-15 14:39 +0200
Re: Possible File iteration bug Billy Mays <noway@nohow.com> - 2011-07-15 08:52 -0400
Re: Possible File iteration bug Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-07-15 22:58 +1000
Re: Possible File iteration bug Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-07-15 16:28 +0200
Re: Possible File iteration bug Billy Mays <81282ed9a88799d21e77957df2d84bd6514d9af6@myhashismyemail.com> - 2011-07-15 10:42 -0400
Re: Possible File iteration bug Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-07-15 22:46 +0200
Re: Possible File iteration bug Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-07-15 14:20 -0700
Re: Possible File iteration bug Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-07-15 17:47 -0400
csiph-web