You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
asyncio.wait_for: process future result produced during cancelation #84849
Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.
Show more details
GitHub fields:
assignee=Noneclosed_at=Nonecreated_at=<Date2020-05-18.17:23:20.075>labels= ['type-feature', '3.9', 'expert-asyncio']
title='asyncio.wait_for: process future result produced during cancelation'updated_at=<Date2020-05-18.22:51:20.953>user='https://github.com/romasku'
In https://bugs.python.org/issue40607 asyncio.wait_for behavior was changed so it propagates exceptions that happened during cancellation. But it still raises TimeoutError if cancelation ends with some value being returned. In the following example value 42 is lost:
importasyncioasyncdefreturn_42_on_cancel():
try:
awaitasyncio.sleep(20)
exceptasyncio.CancelledError:
return42# `return` is useless in this block.asyncdefmain():
try:
awaitasyncio.wait_for(return_42_on_cancel(), timeout=1)
exceptasyncio.TimeoutError:
print('Timeout')
asyncio.run(main())
Regarding the documentation, I'm not sure we _need_ to say what happens in this edge case for 3.9. It was already unspecified before 3.9, so we're not any worse off. (The change in bpo-40607 was, however, documented.)
I'd rather come to agreement on (1) first. Because if we document it now, then it could be interpreted as defined behavior and so harder to change later due to backwards compat guarantees.
Activity
romasku commentedon May 18, 2020
In https://bugs.python.org/issue40607 asyncio.wait_for behavior was changed so it propagates exceptions that happened during cancellation. But it still raises
TimeoutErrorif cancelation ends with some value being returned. In the following example value42is lost:I think it's better to either:
asyncio.wait_for.The motivation here is that if the task returns something, we shouldn't conceal it. I also searched through GitHub and found some places where others catch
CancelledErrorand return value (https://github.com/grpc/grpc/blob/44fb37c99f2853cc23f04fba15468980d9e28e41/src/python/grpcio/grpc/experimental/aio/_interceptor.py#L328).It can also be used with some coroutines developed to be wrapped with
wait_for, for example suppose the following equation solving function:It allows us to control its execution time using asyncio.wait_for.
===
I am a newbie here, so sorry if it is wrong to create such "proposal" issues.
1st1 commentedon May 18, 2020
The documentation update is definitely something that needs to be done in 3.9. Want to submit a PR?
We can also issue a warning in asyncio debug mode.
I'm really not sure about "1) Return that value from
asyncio.wait_for.".The issue is clear, thanks for submitting it! Keep up the great work.
cjerdonek commentedon May 18, 2020
Regarding the documentation, I'm not sure we _need_ to say what happens in this edge case for 3.9. It was already unspecified before 3.9, so we're not any worse off. (The change in bpo-40607 was, however, documented.)
I'd rather come to agreement on (1) first. Because if we document it now, then it could be interpreted as defined behavior and so harder to change later due to backwards compat guarantees.
kumaraditya303 commentedon Oct 22, 2022
Duplicate of #86296
gvanrossum commentedon Oct 22, 2022
Duplicate of #86296
gvanrossum commentedon Oct 22, 2022
(And FWIW I think there we're planning to propagate CancelledError in that case.)
@romasku