Yury Selivanov added the comment: > A better design is to make it so the future that get() is waiting for doesn't > actually receive the item, it is only used to "wake up" the get() coroutine. > I would be something like: > > 1. get(): in case the queue is empty, create a Future, add it to "_getters", > then begin waiting for this future; > 2. When an item is being put(): > 2.1. add the item to the internal queue > 2.2. take the first getter and set its result to None > 3. the get() coroutine resumes, and then takes an item from the internal > queue, returning it. > > Clearly, in this design, handling cancellation in get is much simpler: you > don't need to do anything, just let it cancel, no cleanup action needed.
I like this a lot. Do you want to draft a patch? :) ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23812> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
