On 14/06/2015 11:50, Ben Leslie wrote:
Per Nick's advice I've created enhancement proposal 245340 with an
attached patch.
http://bugs.python.org/issue24450 as opposed to
http://bugs.python.org/issue24450#msg245340 :)
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
wh
On 14 Jun 2015 19:17, "Guido van Rossum" wrote:
>
> A good plan. I think this could be added to 3.5 still? It's a pretty
minor adjustment to the PEP 492 machinery, really.
Good point - as per Ben's original post, the lack of it makes it quite hard
to get a clear picture of the system state when u
Per Nick's advice I've created enhancement proposal 245340 with an
attached patch.
On 14 June 2015 at 19:16, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> A good plan. I think this could be added to 3.5 still? It's a pretty minor
> adjustment to the PEP 492 machinery, really.
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Nic
A good plan. I think this could be added to 3.5 still? It's a pretty minor
adjustment to the PEP 492 machinery, really.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> On 14 Jun 2015 10:01, "Ben Leslie" wrote:
> >
> > If this seems like a good approach I'll try and work it in to a
> >
On 14 Jun 2015 10:01, "Ben Leslie" wrote:
>
> If this seems like a good approach I'll try and work it in to a
> suitable patch for contribution.
I think it's a good approach, and worth opening an enhancement issue for.
I expect any patch would need some adjustments after Yury has finished
revisi
On 14 Jun 2015 03:35, "Guido van Rossum" wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> From a learnability perspective, there's also nothing about an
>> "f_stack" attribute that says "you can use this to find out where a
>> generator or coroutine has delegated control", while
On 14 June 2015 at 09:20, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>> I wonder if in 3.6 it might be possible to *add* some bookkeeping to
>> "await" and "yield from" expressions that provides external visibility
>> into the underlying iterable or coroutine that the generator-iterator
>> or coro
Nick Coghlan wrote:
I wonder if in 3.6 it might be possible to *add* some bookkeeping to
"await" and "yield from" expressions that provides external visibility
into the underlying iterable or coroutine that the generator-iterator
or coroutine has delegated flow control to.
In my original implem
On 2015-06-13 11:38, jaivish kothari wrote:
Hi ,
I had a Question,i hope i'll find the solution here.
Say i have a Queue.
>>> h = Queue.Queue(maxsize=0)
>>> h.put(1)
>>> h.put(2)
>>> h.empty()
False
>>> h.join()
>>> h.empty()
False
>>> h.get()
1
>>> h.get()
2
>>> h.get()
Blocked..
On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 13 June 2015 at 20:25, Ben Leslie wrote:
> > Is there any reason an f_stack attribute is not exposed for frames? Many
> of the
> > other PyFrameObject values are exposed. I'm guessing that there probably
> > aren't too many places where y
On 13 June 2015 at 20:25, Ben Leslie wrote:
> Is there any reason an f_stack attribute is not exposed for frames? Many of
> the
> other PyFrameObject values are exposed. I'm guessing that there probably
> aren't too many places where you can get hold of a frame that doesn't have an
> empty stack
Hi ,
I had a Question,i hope i'll find the solution here.
Say i have a Queue.
>>> h = Queue.Queue(maxsize=0)
>>> h.put(1)
>>> h.put(2)
>>> h.empty()
False
>>> h.join()
>>> h.empty()
False
>>> h.get()
1
>>> h.get()
2
>>> h.get()
Blocked...
My Question is :
In a single thre
On 13 June 2015 at 19:03, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>> On 13 June 2015 at 04:13, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> > IOW I don't think that the problem here is that you haven't sufficiently
>> > motivated your use case -- you are asking for infor
On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 13 June 2015 at 04:13, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > IOW I don't think that the problem here is that you haven't sufficiently
> > motivated your use case -- you are asking for information that just isn't
> > available. (Which is actually w
On 13 June 2015 at 17:22, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 13 June 2015 at 04:13, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> IOW I don't think that the problem here is that you haven't sufficiently
>> motivated your use case -- you are asking for information that just isn't
>> available. (Which is actually where you sta
On 13 June 2015 at 04:13, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> IOW I don't think that the problem here is that you haven't sufficiently
> motivated your use case -- you are asking for information that just isn't
> available. (Which is actually where you started the thread -- you can get to
> the frame of the
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Ben Leslie wrote:
> On 2 June 2015 at 14:39, Yury Selivanov wrote:
> > Hi Ben,
> >
> > On 2015-05-31 8:35 AM, Ben Leslie wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Yury,
> >>
> >> I'm just starting my exploration into using async/await; all my
> >> 'real-world' scenarios are currently
On 2 June 2015 at 14:39, Yury Selivanov wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On 2015-05-31 8:35 AM, Ben Leslie wrote:
>>
>> Hi Yury,
>>
>> I'm just starting my exploration into using async/await; all my
>> 'real-world' scenarios are currently hypothetical.
>>
>> One such hypothetical scenario however is that if I
Hi Ben,
On 2015-05-31 8:35 AM, Ben Leslie wrote:
Hi Yury,
I'm just starting my exploration into using async/await; all my
'real-world' scenarios are currently hypothetical.
One such hypothetical scenario however is that if I have a server
process running, with some set of concurrent connection
Hi Yury,
I'm just starting my exploration into using async/await; all my
'real-world' scenarios are currently hypothetical.
One such hypothetical scenario however is that if I have a server
process running, with some set of concurrent connections, each managed
by a co-routine. Each co-routine is
Hi Ben,
Is there any real-world scenario where you would need this?
It looks like this can help with debugging, somehow, but the easiest
solution is to put a "if debug: log(...)" before "yield" in your
"switch()" function. You'll have a perfect traceback there.
Thanks,
Yury
On 2015-05-29 12:4
21 matches
Mail list logo
