-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 58
Removing loop name from asyncio.create_task #489
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
Merged
vgvoleg
merged 23 commits into
ydb-platform:main
from
alex2211-put:alex2211-put-patch-1
Sep 26, 2024
Merged
Changes from 16 commits
Commits
Show all changes
23 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
036ea0b
Update topic_writer_asyncio.py
alex2211-put 66d9725
Update topic_reader_asyncio.py
alex2211-put 7116965
Update topic_writer_asyncio.py
alex2211-put 10974e0
Update topic_reader_asyncio.py
alex2211-put 8c18767
Update topic_reader_asyncio.py
alex2211-put 2d5c288
Update topic_reader_asyncio.py
alex2211-put 8767bd3
Update topic_reader_asyncio.py
alex2211-put c5e3a64
Update topic_reader_asyncio.py
alex2211-put 34e2a0a
add wrapper for asyncio.create_task
alex2211-put f4d3bcc
fix linters
alex2211-put a779513
fix linters
alex2211-put 1bcb726
fix linters
alex2211-put e33b9c4
fix linters
alex2211-put ef44568
fix linters
alex2211-put 2021696
fix linters
alex2211-put 2082cb8
fix linters
alex2211-put b6908b5
split setting task name during function declaration stage
alex2211-put d489a62
fix tests
alex2211-put 2534b70
fix tests
alex2211-put 724f6a1
fix linters
alex2211-put 7c5bb8a
fix linters
alex2211-put 63abf15
fix linters
alex2211-put fa5cc42
fix tests
alex2211-put 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 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
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
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
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 weird how we pass name and args. This wrapper could get already created task and use
task.set_name(name)
in case of python 3.8+. In this case you will don't have any problems betweenasyncio.create_task()
andloop.create_task()
because they both return a Task you can pass into your wrapperAlso this wrapper could have a better name, because the current one doesn't explain anything we do with the task.
I don't have anything against hexversion, but I'm sure we can omit this check on every wrapper call. We could use this split during function declaration stage. In this case, if we will have only one
if
call, think about switching toversion_info
for better readability (i'm not insist here)