Martin Teichmann <martin.teichm...@gmail.com> added the comment:
Yes, in the one-producer-many-consumers situation on can indeed to the trick with the None. But this is just a clumsy hack, cancelling the tasks is IMHO more in line with asyncio. In the many-producers-one-consumer scenario this does not work. The one dead consumer cannot feed back to the producers. Sure, there are still many hacks imaginable, but a closing or cancelling the queue is a very clear way of doing things. As for the naming: I personally don't care, close() or cancel() are both fine with me. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue37334> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
