New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
allow running multiple instances of IDLE #41982
Comments
This patch will allow running multiple instances of (Not tested on windows.) |
Logged In: YES Duplicate of IDLEfork 661363 Will not be considered until remaining problems with socket Note: You can start as many copies of IDLE as you want with Also note: |
Logged In: YES My use case is just that I find it annoying that in the Regarding the note, I didn't understand the comment because |
Logged In: YES First of all, there is (theoretically) no reason to un IDLE IDLE's "Run Module" option is very handy but its behavior On windows the Python installer adds "Edit with IDLE" to I often teach Python using IDLE. Having IDLE sometimes run Allowing multiple instances, each with a subprocess P.S. I've been using this patch for some time, it works |
Logged In: YES There are a couple of reasons: some systems don't But there is one major problem: on Windows, it's I certainly agree with you that it would be very https://sourceforge.net/tracker/ Maybe we can get this fixed in 2.6. It's way too Could you add your patch so I can look at it? |
Logged In: YES I agree that IDLE must have a no-subprocess mode, since it On systems without networking trying to use sockets will Well, we could "dodge" the Windows problem for now by having
Also, if a collision happens the listening socket won't I submitted my implementation as a separate patch. |
Logged In: YES On Windows 2000, at least, when a collision occurs However, your patch 1529142, though a hack, may be |
Logged In: YES My patch is not so much a hack, it's actually a more optimal </sleepy attempt at humor> Anyways, I remember seeing something about "reuse address" if self.allow_reuse_address:
self.socket.setsockopt(socket.SOL_SOCKET,
socket.SO_REUSEADDR, 1)
self.socket.bind(self.server_address) And this comment in BaseHTTPServer.py: allow_reuse_address = 1 # Seems to make sense in testing
environment Could socket.SO_REUSEADDR be the cause? What does it default Maybe we should get the discussion up and running again in |
Logged In: YES I don't mean to be derogatory by calling it a Regarding REUSEADDR, if it is not set True there is As I recollect, it's ten sec, and so very annoying Guido clued me in on REUSEADDR, which solved the http://www.unixguide.net/network/socketfaq/4.5.shtml IDLE discussion should be on IDLE-dev unless it's |
Logged In: YES Timeout might have been a whole minute. |
Logged In: YES Timeout with REUSADDR tends to be several minutes. <http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/ Picking the first available port and disabling SO_REUSEADDR should therefore |
This should be dropped in favor of issue bpo-1529142, which proposes a |
Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.
Show more details
GitHub fields:
bugs.python.org fields:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: