[2.7] bpo-32362: Fix references to non-existent multiprocessing.Connection() (GH-6223)#6646
Conversation
…ction() (pythonGH-6223). (cherry picked from commit 9f3535c) Co-authored-by: Bo Bayles <[email protected]>
|
Thank you for your backport @bbayles. But things are more complex in 2.7. |
|
Ah, you are quite right. I see now how the Python 3 docs got to be the way they are.
I think the simplest change would be to change the reference to to simply |
|
I think I've done that by un-setting the |
serhiy-storchaka
left a comment
serhiy-storchaka
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know what is the bests solution here. Removing the multiprocessing. looks like an improvement.
| Returns a pair ``(conn1, conn2)`` of :class:`Connection` objects representing | ||
| the ends of a pipe. | ||
| Returns a pair ``(conn1, conn2)`` of :class:`Connection` objects | ||
| representing the ends of a pipe. |
|
|
||
| Usually message passing between processes is done using queues or by using | ||
| :class:`~multiprocessing.Connection` objects returned by | ||
| :class:`~Connection` objects returned by |
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | ||
|
|
||
| When one uses :meth:`Connection.recv <multiprocessing.Connection.recv>`, the | ||
| When one uses :meth:`Connection.recv <Connection.recv>`, the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just :meth:`Connection.recv`.
| data received is automatically | ||
| unpickled. Unfortunately unpickling data from an untrusted source is a security | ||
| risk. Therefore :class:`Listener` and :func:`Client` use the :mod:`hmac` module | ||
| unpickled. Unfortunately unpickling data from an untrusted source is a security |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unneeded (and unwanted) changes.
| :func:`Pipe <multiprocessing.Pipe>` -- see also | ||
| :ref:`multiprocessing-listeners-clients`. | ||
|
|
||
| .. class:: Connection |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe add the :noindex: option?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks like this breaks the links, e.g. here:
I doubt that's desirable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, I wanted just exclude it from the index, but seems this doesn't work this way.
|
OK, thanks. I've changed those things. |
|
Er, it seems I pushed the wrong thing - apologies. |
| :func:`Pipe <multiprocessing.Pipe>` -- see also | ||
| :ref:`multiprocessing-listeners-clients`. | ||
|
|
||
| .. class:: Connection |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, I wanted just exclude it from the index, but seems this doesn't work this way.
4 participants
This PR is a backport of #6223 to 2.7.
While fixing the conflict, I noticed a mistake in the 2.7 docs. This section states there are "two" exceptions, but then goes on to define only one. I will make a separate PR for that.
CC: @serhiy-storchaka
https://bugs.python.org/issue32362