-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32.1k
gh-94972: document that shield users need to keep a reference to their task #96724
New 8000 issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for finishing this! I'll merge now.
Oh wait, it's still in draft. I'll leave it up to you to remove draft mode; ping the PR and I'll merge it then. |
@gvanrossum: Moved out of draft, thanks for the early review. |
Thanks @hendrikmakait for the PR, and @gvanrossum for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.10. |
Thanks @hendrikmakait for the PR, and @gvanrossum for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.11. |
GH-96736 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.10 branch. |
GH-96737 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.11 branch. |
…o their task (pythonGH-96724) Co-authored-by: Thomas Grainger <tagrain@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 6281aff) Co-authored-by: Hendrik Makait <hendrik.makait@gmail.com>
…o their task (pythonGH-96724) Co-authored-by: Thomas Grainger <tagrain@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 6281aff) Co-authored-by: Hendrik Makait <hendrik.makait@gmail.com>
Thanks Hendrik for finishing this up! Thomas I hope you’re doing okay. |
…r task (GH-96724) Co-authored-by: Thomas Grainger <tagrain@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 6281 8000 aff) Co-authored-by: Hendrik Makait <hendrik.makait@gmail.com>
Sorry that I'm bringing this up so late. But, is this actually needed? It seems to me that If I'm wrong about that somewhere, shouldn't we just fix |
@Dreamsorcerer when the result of shield is cancelled the reference to the original task is dropped |
Ah, yes, fair enough. Still feels like an explicit reference could be kept on But, with the proposed workaround, wouldn't the function that holds the |
I will take over the original PR (#94973) from @graingert to get it over the finish line.