[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: New changeset 57b698886b47bb81c782c2ba80a8a72fe66c7aad by Elvis Pranskevichus in branch '3.8': [3.8] bpo-32751: Wait for task cancel in asyncio.wait_for() when timeout <= 0 (GH-21895) (#21967)

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Change by Elvis Pranskevichus : -- pull_requests: +21077 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/21968 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Change by Elvis Pranskevichus : -- pull_requests: +21076 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/21967 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Łukasz Langa added the comment: New changeset 1036ccb55de4abc70837cb46a72ddbb370b8fc94 by Miss Islington (bot) in branch '3.9': bpo-32751: Wait for task cancel in asyncio.wait_for() when timeout <= 0 (GH-21895) (GH-21963)

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: New changeset c517fc712105c8e5930cb42baaebdbe37fc3e15f by Elvis Pranskevichus in branch 'master': bpo-32751: Wait for task cancel in asyncio.wait_for() when timeout <= 0 (#21895)

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Change by miss-islington : -- pull_requests: +21073 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/21963 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Change by Elvis Pranskevichus : -- nosy: +Elvis.Pranskevichus nosy_count: 6.0 -> 7.0 pull_requests: +21014 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/21895 ___ Python tracker

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Change by Yury Selivanov : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed type: -> behavior ___ Python tracker ___

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

miss-islington added the comment: New changeset d8948c5e09c4a2a818f6f6cfaf8064f2c2138fa5 by Miss Islington (bot) in branch '3.7': bpo-32751: Wait for task cancellation in asyncio.wait_for() (GH-7216) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/d8948c5e09c4a2a818f6f6cfaf8064f2c2138fa5

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Change by miss-islington : -- pull_requests: +6854 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: New changeset e2b340ab4196e1beb902327f503574b5d7369185 by Yury Selivanov (Elvis Pranskevichus) in branch 'master': bpo-32751: Wait for task cancellation in asyncio.wait_for() (GH-7216)

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Change by Elvis Pranskevichus : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +6848 stage: -> patch review ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: > Fair enough. And I can't think of any specific way that fixing this is likely > to break anyone, just it's subtle enough that I don't necessarily trust my > intuition :-). In case we find out it doesn't work or causes problems during the beta/rc period,

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Nathaniel Smith added the comment: Fair enough. And I can't think of any specific way that fixing this is likely to break anyone, just it's subtle enough that I don't necessarily trust my intuition :-). -- ___ Python tracker

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: Well, we'll have another beta (beta 5) and then a release candidate. I think it's enough. I don't feel comfortable with asyncio living with this bug till 3.8. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Nathaniel Smith added the comment: Wow, yeah, that is a tricky one. Didn't Ned say, though, that at this point we should be treating 3.7 like an already-released bugfix-only branch? -- ___ Python tracker

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: https://bugs.python.org/issue33638 is an example of a very tricky bug caused by wait_for. -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: +1 one to fix this in 3.7, Elvis is working on the patch. I don't think we should backport to 3.6 though as it's a behaviour change that people might not expect to get from a bug-fix release. -- versions: -Python 3.5, Python 3.6

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Change by Xavier G. Domingo : -- nosy: +xgdomingo ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Theoretically we can start monitoring cancelled tasks and report about them if the task is still not finished, say, in a minute or two. It is a new feature, sure. I'm fine with waiting for cancelled task in wait_for(). --

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Nathaniel Smith added the comment: How do you tell the difference between a cancelled task that's about to exit, and one that will never exit? -- ___ Python tracker

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Agree. Should we report about cancelled but still executing tasks? It would be a nice feature. I'm talking not about `wait_for` only but task cancellation in general. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Nathaniel Smith added the comment: If a task refuses to be cancelled, then is waiting for it forever actually wrong? That's the same thing as happens if I do 'task.cancel(); await task', right? Currently wait_for will abandon such a task, but then it's still left running in

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Hmm, I don't see an easy way to fix it. awaiting for cancelled task potentially can wait forever. Adding another timeout looks too confusing. Iterating over a couple of loop steps is not reliable: try/finally block in awaited task can

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

Yury Selivanov added the comment: Looks like a bug. Andrew, if you have time to look at this, please feel free to go ahead; I'm going to be unavailable till Feb 12 (so I can take a look myself after that). -- ___ Python

[issue32751] wait_for(future, ...) should wait for the future (even if a timeout occurs)

New submission from Nathaniel Smith : Currently, if you use asyncio.wait_for(future, timeout=) and the timeout expires, then it (a) cancels to the future, and then (b) returns. This is fine if the future is a Future, because Future.cancel is synchronous and completes