Joshua Moore-Oliva added the comment: My patch is ready for review, if I followed the process correctly I think you should have received an email
https://codereview.appspot.com/145220043 > By the way I just looked at wait_for.py; it has a bug where do_work() isn't > using yield-from with the sleep() call. But that may well be the issue you > were trying to debug, and this does not change my opinion about the issue That was not intended, it was just a mistake. (A quick aside on yield from, feel free to ignore, I don't expect to change anyone's opinion on this) I don't use "yield from" much - my first use of asyncio was porting an application from gevent (I made a small custom wrapper with fibers (https://pypi.python.org/pypi/fibers) that can internally yield on coroutines). I have read https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2014/02/unyielding.html but in my cases, I tend to write my code with the thought that any non standard library function can yield (I initially tried porting to vanilla asyncio, but I ended up having yield from almost everywhere). In the rare cases I want to ensure no yielding takes place across function calls, I like the way gruvi (https://github.com/geertj/gruvi) handles it with a construct to assert no yielding takes place. with assert_no_switchpoints(): do_something() do_something_else() I also find that it is less error prone (missing a yield from), but that is a minor point as I could write a static analyzer (on top of test cases ofc) to check for that. But that's just my opinion and opinion's evolve :) ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue22448> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
