New submission from Yahya Abou Imran <yahya-abou-im...@protonmail.com>:

In asyncio.Task help:

 |  set_exception(self, exception, /)
 |      Mark the future done and set an exception.
 |      
 |      If the future is already done when this method is called, raises
 |      InvalidStateError.
 |  
 |  set_result(self, result, /)
 |      Mark the future done and set its result.
 |      
 |      If the future is already done when this method is called, raises
 |      InvalidStateError.

These doctrings are inherited from asyncio.Future.

But in fact it's wrong since:

https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/4824385fec0a1de99b4183f995a3e4923771bf64/Lib/asyncio/tasks.py#L161:

    def set_result(self, result):
        raise RuntimeError('Task does not support set_result operation')

    def set_exception(self, exception):
        raise RuntimeError('Task does not support set_exception operation')

Just adding another docstring is not a good solution - at leas for me - because 
the problem is in fact deeper:

This prove by itself that a Task is not a Future in fact, or shouldn't be, 
because this breaks the Liskov substitution principle.

We could have both Future and Task inheriting from some base class like 
PendingOperation witch would contain all the methods of Future except these two 
setters.

One problem to deal with might be those calls to super().set_result/exception() 
in Task._step():

https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/4824385fec0a1de99b4183f995a3e4923771bf64/Lib/asyncio/tasks.py#L254

        except StopIteration as exc:
            if self._must_cancel:
                # Task is cancelled right before coro stops.
                self._must_cancel = False
                super().set_exception(exceptions.CancelledError())
            else:
                super().set_result(exc.value)
        except exceptions.CancelledError:
            super().cancel()  # I.e., Future.cancel(self).
        except Exception as exc:
            super().set_exception(exc)
        except BaseException as exc:
            super().set_exception(exc)
            raise

One way to deal with that would be to let a Task have a Future.
"Prefer composition over inheritance" as they say.

I want to work on PR for this if nobody goes against it...

PS: I really don't like when some people says that Python core developers are 
known to have poor knowledge in regard to OOP principles. So I really don't 
like letting something like this in the standard library...

----------
messages: 331570
nosy: yahya-abou-imran
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: asyncio.Task.set_result() and set_exception() missing docstrings (and 
Liskov sub. principle)
type: enhancement
versions: Python 3.8

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35456>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to