[issue45339] concurrent.future.ThreadPoolExecutor should parameterize class used for threads

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I guess if you are asking for initialization and finalization of thread-specific data in a thread pool -- you need exactly these things (or a context manager). A custom thread class reveals too many implementation details. I personally prefer an explicit

[issue46487] `_SSLProtocolTransport` doesn't have the `get_write_buffer_limits` implementation.

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- versions: -Python 3.7, Python 3.8 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46487> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailin

[issue46487] `_SSLProtocolTransport` doesn't have the `get_write_buffer_limits` implementation.

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 64568acbd88a88d54ac9b8215447f88280448dd5 by Emiya in branch 'main': bpo-46487: Add `get_write_buffer_limits` to Write and _SSLProtocol transports (GH-30958) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/64568acbd88a88d54ac9b8215447f8

[issue46487] `_SSLProtocolTransport` doesn't have the `get_write_buffer_limits` implementation.

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Done, thanks! -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46583] Modernize `selectors.py` by removing unused `sys.version_info` check

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 3483aa65dfebfc60a87ea9db3f20da84be41f606 by Nikita Sobolev in branch 'main': bpo-46583: remove unused `sys.version_info` check from `selectors` (GH-31023) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/3483aa65dfebfc60a87ea9db3f20da

[issue46583] Modernize `selectors.py` by removing unused `sys.version_info` check

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46583] Modernize `selectors.py` by removing unused `sys.version_info` check

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: The change should NOT be backported, it doesn't fix any bug but clears code a little -- versions: -Python 3.10, Python 3.9 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/is

[issue46622] Support decorating a coroutine with functools.cached_property

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Pull Request is welcome! I would say that the PR should not use asyncio directly but 'async def', 'await', and `inspect.iscoroutine()` / `inspect.iscoroutinefunction()` instead. The property should work with any async framewo

[issue46622] Support decorating a coroutine with functools.cached_property

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: You can return a wrapper from __get__ that awaits the inner function and saves the result somewhere. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46708] test_asyncio: test_sock_client_fail() changes asyncio.events._event_loop_policy

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Thanks for the report! Let me make a fix PR in a few minutes -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46708] test_asyncio: test_sock_client_fail() changes asyncio.events._event_loop_policy

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +29421 stage: -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31253 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issu

[issue46708] test_asyncio: test_sock_client_fail() changes asyncio.events._event_loop_policy

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- pull_requests: +29423 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31255 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46708] test_asyncio: test_sock_client_fail() changes asyncio.events._event_loop_policy

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- pull_requests: +29424 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31256 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46708] test_asyncio: test_sock_client_fail() changes asyncio.events._event_loop_policy

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- versions: +Python 3.10, Python 3.9 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46708> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailin

[issue46708] test_asyncio: test_sock_client_fail() changes asyncio.events._event_loop_policy

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue43216] Removal of @asyncio.coroutine in Python 3.11

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Closed. Thanks for the reminder! -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46622] Support decorating a coroutine with functools.cached_property

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I have a design question. Does `print(await a.hello)` look awkward? I'm not speaking about correction. In asyncio code I have seen before, `await val` means waiting for a future object. `await func()` means async function call. `await obj.attr` looks

[issue46741] Docstring for asyncio.protocols.BufferedProtocol appears out of date

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Alex, you are right. BufferedProtocol is considered stable since 3.8 A pull request with docstring fix is welcome. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46622] Support decorating a coroutine with functools.cached_property

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Agree. Let's start from async functions support by `functools.lru_cache`. If we will have an agreement that cached_property is an important use-case we can return to this issue. I have a feeling that async lru_cache is much more important.

[issue46622] Support decorating a coroutine with functools.cached_property

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: >From my point of view, both sync and async functions can be cached. Sync and async iterators/generators are other beasts: they don't return a value but generate a series of items. The series can be long and memory-consuming, I doubt if it should b

[issue44011] Borrow asyncio ssl implementation from uvloop

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 13c10bfb777483c7b02877aab029345a056b809c by Kumar Aditya in branch 'main': bpo-44011: New asyncio ssl implementation (#31275) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/13c10bfb777483c7b02877aab02934

[issue44011] Borrow asyncio ssl implementation from uvloop

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: The code had landed. Need a follow-up PR with documentation update (mention new ssl_shutdown_timeout arguments) -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue44

[issue44011] Borrow asyncio ssl implementation from uvloop

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- priority: critical -> normal ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue44011> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Un

[issue46741] Docstring for asyncio.protocols.BufferedProtocol appears out of date

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 1d81fdc4c004511c25f74db0e04ddbbb8a04ce6d by Alex Waygood in branch 'main': bpo-46741: Update `asyncio.protocols.BufferedProtocol` docstring (31327) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/1d81fdc4c004511c25f74db0e04ddb

[issue46741] Docstring for asyncio.protocols.BufferedProtocol appears out of date

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 72c46462aa9fd0a69317917ba127e62f94ce08d7 by Miss Islington (bot) in branch '3.10': bpo-46741: Update `asyncio.protocols.BufferedProtocol` docstring (GH-31327) (GH-31362) https://github.com/python/cpyt

[issue46741] Docstring for asyncio.protocols.BufferedProtocol appears out of date

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46318] asyncio and ssl: ResourceWarning: unclosed transport

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Please check against the latest master. It has rewritten SSL protocol implementation borrowed from uvloop. See #44011 for details -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue45390] asyncio.Task doesn't propagate CancelledError() exception correctly.

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- versions: +Python 3.11 -Python 3.9 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue45390> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailin

[issue45390] asyncio.Task doesn't propagate CancelledError() exception correctly.

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +29531 stage: -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31383 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issu

[issue45390] asyncio.Task doesn't propagate CancelledError() exception correctly.

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I have a pull request for the issue. It doesn't use `Future.set_exception()` but creates a new CancelledError() with propagated message. The result is the same, except raised exceptions are not comparable by `is` check. As a benefit, `_cancelled_exc`

[issue45099] asyncio.Task's documentation says that loop arg is removed when it's not

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: User code should not create Task objects explicitly. Please use `asyncio.create_task()` (or shiny new TaskGroup.create_task()) instead. They doesn't have 'loop' argument. -- ___ Python

[issue45098] asyncio.CancelledError should contain more information on cancellations

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: After TaskGroup merging, the second `cancel()` call returns `False` and doesn't initiate the actual cancellation if it was scheduled by the first `cancel()` call. I believe it "fixes" async-timeout: the first

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: The discussion is hot, I see several interleaved threads. Let me put my answers on all of them in order of appearance. 1. quattro cancellation scopes are implemented after async-timeout. As the author of async-timeout I am happy to know it. The module is

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I support Alex Grönholm: TaskGroup is not affected by cancellation races because it doesn't convert the exception or swallows it. The code is safe from my understanding. -- ___ Python tracker &

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- pull_requests: +29539 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31394 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31394 is created for collaboration , Tin Tvrtković is invited. Core devs should have the write access already. Non-core devs, please ask for github invite if you want to collaborate

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: The PR is pretty empty, it has a scaffolding for `asyncio.timeouts` module and its test only. I'll try to add something real tomorrow. My plan is: - solve 'easy' questions with Tin during PR's discussion/reviews - make something that we

[issue45099] asyncio.Task's documentation says that loop arg is removed when it's not

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I have a feeling that we need a low-level API section that describes *supported* API that is intended to task extenders only (guys who want to provide an alternative task factory for example). I love to contribute but not sure when I can find time for this

[issue46777] Fix incorrect use of directives in asyncio documentation

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: > 6. The loop parameter of Task() was documented as both removed and required > (if there is no current event loop) in 3.10. I think we should drop Task() constructor definition from Task Object docs https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio-task.htm

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Guido, the third case: The third edge case is: explicit cancel() happened *after* the timeout (but still in the same iteration)? timeout current-iteration (calls .cancel() after timeout) next-iteration

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: > the third case the behavior is wrong, the `.cancel()` should win over the > timeout. Otherwise using the context manager becomes too risky in real-world > situations. Please elaborate. The first code that calls `.cancel()` wins, doesn't m

[issue46752] Introduce task groups to asyncio and change task cancellation semantics

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- pull_requests: +29550 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31409 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46752] Introduce task groups to asyncio and change task cancellation semantics

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset e7130c2e8c6abfaf04b209bd5b239059eda024b9 by Andrew Svetlov in branch 'main': bpo-46752: Uniform TaskGroup.__repr__ (GH-31409) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/e7130c2e8c6abfaf04b209bd5b2390

[issue46672] NameError in asyncio.gather when passing a invalid type as an arg with multiple awaitables

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 4ab8167b9c60d1a04b2e3116d0c52db254b68cda by Nikita Sobolev in branch 'main': bpo-46672: fix `NameError` in `asyncio.gather` if type check fails (GH-31187) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/4ab8167b9c60d1a04b2e3116d0c52d

[issue46672] NameError in asyncio.gather when passing a invalid type as an arg with multiple awaitables

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- pull_requests: +29572 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31441 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46252] Forbid passing SSLSocket into asyncio methods

New submission from Andrew Svetlov : SSLSocket is a blocking object by definition, it is not compatible with asyncio. asyncio has a check for SSLSocket in sock_*() operations, it should be extended to transport-based API -- title: SSLWantReadError causes _SelectorSocketTransport to

[issue46252] Forbid passing SSLSocket into asyncio methods

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- pull_requests: +29573 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31442 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46805] Add low level UDP socket functions to asyncio

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: A separate issue for 'flags' adding looks better. The reason for missing is an oversight I think. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.o

[issue46252] Forbid passing SSLSocket into asyncio methods

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- versions: +Python 3.9 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46252> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue46252] Forbid passing SSLSocket into asyncio methods

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: The issue can be backported. It doesn't change existing behavior but raises a better error. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/is

[issue46252] Forbid passing SSLSocket into asyncio methods

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- pull_requests: +29574 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31443 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46252] Forbid passing SSLSocket into asyncio methods

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- pull_requests: +29575 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31444 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46672] NameError in asyncio.gather when passing a invalid type as an arg with multiple awaitables

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset a6116a980c9eae91c2f9af7cbd0a9727e9b887ba by Andrew Svetlov in branch '3.9': [3.9] bpo-46672: fix `NameError` in `asyncio.gather` if type check fails (GH-31187) (GH-31441) https://github.com/python/cpyt

[issue46252] Forbid passing SSLSocket into asyncio methods

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Suppose we have a case when two nested timeouts are reached at the same event loop iteration: async def asyncio.timeout(1) as cm1: async with third_party_cm() as cm2: async def asyncio.timeout(1) as cm3: async with third_party_cm() as

[issue46672] NameError in asyncio.gather when passing a invalid type as an arg with multiple awaitables

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset f1916cde24053f4c8b6799730666d19474f8dd09 by Miss Islington (bot) in branch '3.10': bpo-46672: fix `NameError` in `asyncio.gather` if type check fails (GH-31187) (GH-31440) https://github.com/python/cpyt

[issue46672] NameError in asyncio.gather when passing a invalid type as an arg with multiple awaitables

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed versions: +Python 3.11, Python 3.9 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: In docs we can explain the behavior as "the outer expired timeout cancels the inner waiter, waits for CancelError bubbling up, and raising TimeoutError instead". I agree that a counter is required for this behavior. An alternative implementation c

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Updated https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31394 demonstrated the approach with global dict for counters. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Alex, the 'scope' argument can be added if it is really required. I'm not sure if the nonce is unavoidable still. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.pyt

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: > This should be solved when using the cancel count -- the explicit cancel > bumps the cancel count so the cancel scope (i.e. timeout()) will not raise > TimeoutError. Hmmm. Interesting! Timeouts are not the single primitive that should care

[issue46805] Add low level UDP socket functions to asyncio

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Sorry, I was not clear maybe. Newly added methods can have a `flag` argument from the very beginning. Adding a flag to already existing methods requires a separate issue. -- ___ Python tracker <ht

[issue46796] Simplify handling of removed parameter "loop" in asyncio

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 195a46d6ffd4cec6c5fb69c5890f8b1758ac91ca by Serhiy Storchaka in branch 'main': bpo-46796: Simplify handling of removed parameter "loop" in asyncio (GH-31431) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/195a46d6ffd4cec6c5fb

[issue46796] Simplify handling of removed parameter "loop" in asyncio

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46818] Proper way to inherit from collections.abc.Coroutine

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: You don't need send()/throw()/close() methods. aiohttp had them to work with Python 3.5 P.S. Please don't use the bug tracker as Q&A site. -- resolution: -> not a bug stage: -> resolved st

[issue45390] asyncio.Task doesn't propagate CancelledError() exception correctly.

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 4140bcb1cd76dec5cf8d398f4d0e86c438c987d0 by Andrew Svetlov in branch 'main': bpo-45390: Propagate CancelledError's message from cancelled task to its awaiter (GH-31383) https://github.com/python

[issue45390] asyncio.Task doesn't propagate CancelledError() exception correctly.

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46824] use AI_NUMERICHOST | AI_NUMERICSERV to skip getaddrinfo thread in asyncio

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Could you provide more context for the proposed change? -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46824> ___ ___

[issue46818] Proper way to inherit from collections.abc.Coroutine

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: > Are you suggesting that I need to just inherit from Awaitable? Yes. Awaitable is a very base protocol, Coroutine is an implementation. `__await__` returns a generator that is used by Python internals as if `yield from awaitable.__await__()` was cal

[issue46622] Support decorating a coroutine with functools.lru_cache

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- title: Support decorating a coroutine with functools.cached_property -> Support decorating a coroutine with functools.lru_cache ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issu

[issue46827] asyncio SelectorEventLoop.sock_connect fails with a UDP socket

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 8fb94893e4a870ed3533e80c4bc2f1ebf1cfa9e7 by Thomas Grainger in branch 'main': bpo-46827: pass sock.type to getaddrinfo in sock_connect (GH-31499) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/8fb94893e4a870ed3533e80c4bc2f1

[issue46827] asyncio SelectorEventLoop.sock_connect fails with a UDP socket

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue44011] Borrow asyncio ssl implementation from uvloop

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue45146] Add a possibility for asyncio.Condition to determine the count of currently waiting consumers

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Sorry, your use-case looks not convincing but overcomplicated. -- resolution: -> rejected stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46829] Confusing CancelError message if multiple cancellations are scheduled

New submission from Andrew Svetlov : Suppose multiple `task.cancel(msg)` with different messages are called on the same event loop iteration. What message (`cancel_exc.args[0]`) should be sent on the next loop iteration? As of Python 3.10 it is the message from the *last* `task.cancel(msg

[issue44886] asyncio: create_datagram_endpoint() does not return a DatagramTransport

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +29639 stage: -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31512 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issu

[issue44886] asyncio: create_datagram_endpoint() does not return a DatagramTransport

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- versions: +Python 3.10, Python 3.11 -Python 3.8 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue44886> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list m

[issue44886] asyncio: create_datagram_endpoint() does not return a DatagramTransport

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- assignee: -> asvetlov ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue44886> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscrib

[issue45883] reuse_address mistakenly removed from loop.create_server

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue43119] asyncio.Queue.put never yields if the queue is unbounded

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Sorry, that's how asyncio works: it never switches to another task if `await ...` doesn't need to wait for something actually. Adding `await asyncio.sleep(0)` to every call decreases performance. -- resolution: -> wont fix stage:

[issue46829] Confusing CancelError message if multiple cancellations are scheduled

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Deprecation is a good answer. Let's not forget to apply it to 3.11 then. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/is

[issue46522] concurrent.futures.__getattr__ raises the wrong AttributeError message

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 9b12b1b803d7b73640ab637a74a6f35f3fe9db21 by Thomas Grainger in branch 'main': bpo-46522: fix concurrent.futures and io AttributeError messages (GH-30887) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/9b12b1b803d7b73640ab637a74a6f3

[issue46522] concurrent.futures.__getattr__ raises the wrong AttributeError message

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- versions: -Python 3.10, Python 3.9 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46522> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailin

[issue46522] concurrent.futures.__getattr__ raises the wrong AttributeError message

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46522> ___ ___

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: If some code is used together with timeout() and this code calls `.cancel()` but forgot about `.uncancel()` in try/except/finally -- timeout() never raises TimeoutError. Should we care? The missing `.uncancel()` call is hard to detect by the runtime and

[issue46622] Add an async variant of lru_cache for coroutines.

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Thanks, Raymond. I agree that caching of iterators and generators is out of the issue scope. Also, I agree that a separate async cache decorator should be added. I prefer the `async_lru_cache` (and maybe `async_cache` for the API symmetry). We have

[issue45390] asyncio.Task doesn't propagate CancelledError() exception correctly.

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Serhiy is right, Condition.wait() has the following code: finally: # Must reacquire lock even if wait is cancelled cancelled = False while True: try: await self.acquire

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I have no good simple real-case scenario, sorry. There is a demonstration of my thoughts. Suppose we have a custom context manager that behaves similar to timeout() but is controlled not by timer but external event source (it could be an invalidation

[issue46771] Add some form of cancel scopes

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Clear, thanks! -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46771> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue46844] Context-based TaskGroup for legacy libraries

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: -1 Now bare `create_task()` does fire-and-forget action. After the proposed change it will fail loudly. Even if this behavior is better it is not backward compatible. People start blaming and asking "how to return everything

[issue46844] Context-based TaskGroup for legacy libraries

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I personally don't think that the described opt-in trick should be a part of asyncio. A third-party library that patches asyncio.create_task() can be a useful thing though during the transition period. We even cannot deprecate asyncio.create_task() righ

[issue44886] asyncio: create_datagram_endpoint() does not return a DatagramTransport

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46859] NameError: free variable 'outer' referenced before assignment in enclosing scope

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Also, fix is 1 week old. There are no python releases with the fix included yet. On Sat, Feb 26, 2022, 06:58 Norman Fung wrote: > > Norman Fung added the comment: > > Thanks Jelle, let me try upgrade first. > > Norman > > On Sat,

[issue44011] Borrow asyncio ssl implementation from uvloop

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: New changeset 41ddcd3f40f8171a396e57b841a74fcc83884eab by Kumar Aditya in branch 'main': bpo-44011: Document ssl_shutdown_timeout added by revisited asyncio SSL implementation (GH-31597) https://github.com/python/cpyt

[issue46318] asyncio and ssl: ResourceWarning: unclosed transport

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Awesome! -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46318> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue46318] asyncio and ssl: ResourceWarning: unclosed transport

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed versions: -Python 3.10, Python 3.7, Python 3.8, Python 3.9 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue45159] data_received called on protocol after call to pause_reading on ssl transport

Change by Andrew Svetlov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed versions: +Python 3.11 -Python 3.10 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue30698] asyncio sslproto do not shutdown ssl layer cleanly

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Agree -- resolution: -> duplicate stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.or

[issue46672] NameError in asyncio.gather when passing a invalid type as an arg with multiple awaitables

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Correct. 3.8 is in security mode. It doesn't accept regular patches -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/is

[issue43253] asyncio open_connection fails when a socket is explicitly closed

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Please consider passing 'sock' argument as the ownership transfer. You should not perform any action on 'sock' object directly anymore. This is true for all asyncio API. -- resolution: -> not a bug stage: -> resol

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >