Message345389
| Author |
asvetlov |
| Recipients |
Nick Davies, asvetlov, lukasz.langa, miss-islington, sdunster, thatch, yselivanov |
| Date |
2019-06-12.17:26:52 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1560360412.57.0.19277940869.issue36607@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
|
| Content |
Lukasz, please don't rush.
Applied PR makes asyncio more stable, not worse.
I see the only way to make it perfect: get rid of weak refs entirely.
Otherwise there is always a chance to catch GC run and set element deletion on iteration over the set. Sorry, that's how weakrefs work.
There is such possibility: call asyncio._unregister_task() explicitly when the task is done (finished with success or failure or cancelled).
By this, we can replace weakset with a regular set.
The only requirement is that task should call this _unregister_task() method.
No public API change is needed.
At the time of work on 3.7, Yuri and I considered this implementation but rejected it because there was a (very low) chance that somebody may implement own task, register custom task factory and don't call _unregister_task().
I never see a code that implements asyncio task from scratch, people always reuse existing asyncio.Task.
So, maybe the idea is not such bad. It can be implemented easily. I'm volunteered to make a PR with the proposal demonstration in a day or two, depending on my free time. |
|