Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

 Sign up
Appearance settings

gh-94597: deprecate asyncio.set_event_loop_policy#110728

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Closed

Conversation

graingert
Copy link
Contributor

@graingertgraingert commentedOct 11, 2023•
edited by bedevere-appbot
Loading

@graingertgraingert changed the titledeprecate asyncio.set_event_loop_policygh-94597: deprecate asyncio.set_event_loop_policyOct 11, 2023
@graingertgraingertforce-pushed thedeprecate-set-event-loop-policy branch 4 times, most recently froma7fe31c to339445eCompareOctober 11, 2023 17:18
Copy link
Contributor

@cjw296cjw296 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

No objection to the unittest or AsyncMock changes!

Copy link
Member

@gvanrossumgvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Just a few nits, basically LG. ThattearDownModule() pattern is annoying! :-)

I assume that deprecatingget_event_loop_policy() will follow? Are there other APIs? I'm guessing we also want to avoid instantiating or subclassing the standard event loop policy classes (I expect this will turn up some significant uses of them).

Before we merge this we may need to bring this up on discuss.python.org (in the asyncio category) to see if there are significant objections to the proposed deprecation schedule.

…o8Q4.rstCo-authored-by: Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum@gmail.com>
@graingert
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

graingert commentedOct 26, 2023•
edited
Loading

Just a few nits, basically LG. ThattearDownModule() pattern is annoying! :-)

I think we can start getting rid of those tearDownModules using#110774

I assume that deprecatingget_event_loop_policy() will follow? Are there other APIs? I'm guessing we also want to avoid instantiating or subclassing the standard event loop policy classes (I expect this will turn up some significant uses of them).

Yep currently that's a bit more complicated because get/set_event_loop calls get_event_loop_policy and afaik we don't want to make get_event_loop an alias of get_running_loop anymore

Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <hugovk@users.noreply.github.com>
@graingert
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Before we merge this we may need to bring this up on discuss.python.org (in the asyncio category) to see if there are significant objections to the proposed deprecation schedule.

discuss post posted here:https://discuss.python.org/t/removing-the-asyncio-policy-system-asyncio-set-event-loop-policy-in-python-3-15/37553

willingc reacted with thumbs up emoji

Copy link
Member

@gvanrossumgvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Okay, I'm happy with this. Let's wait a bit if anyone brings up substantial objections in theDiscourse thread.

Copy link
Contributor

@willingcwillingc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Bravo@graingert for simplifying. ✨

Copy link
Contributor

@kumaraditya303kumaraditya303 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Please also add a notice underasyncio changes, most users like myself won't look under 3.15 removals for this change. Thanks

@bedevere-app
Copy link

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phraseI have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

And if you don't make the requested changes, you will be poked with soft cushions!

@graingert
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Please also add a notice underasyncio changes, most users like myself won't look under 3.15 removals for this change. Thanks

Can you link me to the location in the docs that you mean please?

@kumaraditya303
Copy link
Contributor

kumaraditya303 commentedNov 1, 2023•
edited
Loading

Can you link me to the location in the docs that you mean please?

Addasyncio entry inhttps://docs.python.org/3.13/whatsnew/3.13.html#deprecated

@hugovk
Copy link
Member

That sounds fine, then let's move it from the "Pending Removal in Python 3.15" section to this one.

@graingert
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

I have made the requested changes; please review again

willingc reacted with thumbs up emoji

Copy link
Member

@gvanrossumgvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

LGTM, but let's wait until the dust in the Discourse thread settles.

@1st1
Copy link
Member

Happy to review and hopefully merge this during the core sprint.

@graingertgraingert deleted the deprecate-set-event-loop-policy branchDecember 25, 2024 08:05
@graingert
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

graingert commentedDec 25, 2024•
edited
Loading

@kumaraditya303 is doing this now ingh-127949

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@cjw296cjw296cjw296 left review comments

@hugovkhugovkhugovk left review comments

@kumaraditya303kumaraditya303kumaraditya303 requested changes

@willingcwillingcwillingc approved these changes

@gvanrossumgvanrossumgvanrossum approved these changes

@vsajipvsajipAwaiting requested review from vsajipvsajip is a code owner

@1st11st1Awaiting requested review from 1st11st1 is a code owner

@asvetlovasvetlovAwaiting requested review from asvetlovasvetlov is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Projects
Archived in project
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants
@graingert@hugovk@kumaraditya303@1st1@cjw296@willingc@gvanrossum@asvetlov
[8]ページ先頭
©2009-2025 Movatter.jp