use c.f.Future to wait across threads #940
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Future allows us to propagate errors across threads, instead of threading.Event, which only waits forever and can result in uninformative hangs if there are errors.
Contributor
I think it's better it's better to raise an error just to be sure that we're doing things as expected. |
ccordoba12
approved these changes
Mar 30, 2023
Contributor
ccordoba12
left a comment
ccordoba12
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me, thanks @minrk!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Future allows us to propagate errors across threads, instead of threading.Event, which only waits forever and can result in uninformative hangs if there are errors.
this is related to spyder-ide/spyder#20381 where flush is being called on a closed stream, but the traceback doesn't track to the actual caller of
channel.flush()because of how it's scheduled.This shouldn't actually change the behavior, only improve error reporting when e.g. calling flush on a closed channel.
Alternately, we could choose to turn this error into a warning, which would in fact be a change in behavior.