-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 348
New 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
Refactor channel interfaces #1115
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
9980f3f
Refactor channel interfaces
njsmith 17fce62
yapf
njsmith e6c6c40
fix newsfragment
njsmith 6e5000a
see if this helps with pypy?
njsmith 68f680b
Convert the Generic/ABC metaclass hack into a generic solution
njsmith d2eb09c
Add discussion of channels allowing simultaneous send/receive
njsmith File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ | ||
We cleaned up the distinction between the "abstract channel interface" | ||
and the "memory channel" concrete implementation. | ||
`trio.abc.SendChannel` and `trio.abc.ReceiveChannel` have been slimmed | ||
down, `trio.MemorySendChannel` and `trio.MemoryReceiveChannel` are now | ||
public types that can be used in type hints, and there's a new | ||
`trio.abc.Channel` interface for future bidirectional channels. |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
It seems like it would be useful to explicitly document what is and is not guaranteed about tasks calling send() or receive() simultaneously for all Channels. Also maybe something about cancellation safety. If you want to stop guaranteeing that multiple simultaneous receive() works OK, maybe move this text to MemoryReceiveChannel.receive() instead of removing it entirely?
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.
Hmm, yeah. I'm thinking ahead to "framing channels" that just wrap line-breaking or whatever around a stream, so they'll have the same single-user rule as streams. But that's a good point.