Message301235
Greg Smith & I are looking at this at the core dev sprint, and we think some variant of the "atomic until" idea should work, but there's a prerequisite change to the way "async with" works: the "GET_AWAITABLE" opcodes need to be avoided in this case, as they call __await__, and hence may run arbitrary Python code.
We can't see any immediate barriers to moving those calls up into BEFORE_ASYNC_WITH, such that what ends up on the eval loop's stack is the already resolved iterable for use by YIELD FROM, rather than combining GET_AWAITABLE+YIELD_FROM the way a normal await expression does.
That would then give the preamble:
BEFORE_ASYNC_WITH (resolves __aenter__ and __aexit__ to iterables)
LOAD_CONST 0
YIELD_FROM (need to skip signal processing here)
SETUP_ASYNC_WITH
And the postamble:
POP_BLOCK (need to skip signal processing until YIELD_FROM)
LOAD_CONST 0
WITH_CLEANUP_START
LOAD_CONST 0
YIELD_FROM
WITH_CLEANUP_FINISH
We also agree that adding some kind of test injection hook (potentially limited to pydebug builds, depending on exactly how it works) is likely to be a necessary to be able to test this. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2017-09-04 18:09:58 | ncoghlan | set | recipients:
+ ncoghlan, gregory.p.smith, njs, Mark.Shannon, erik.bray, jdemeyer, yselivanov, deleted0524, xgdomingo |
2017-09-04 18:09:58 | ncoghlan | set | messageid: <1504548598.39.0.657458334625.issue29988@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2017-09-04 18:09:58 | ncoghlan | link | issue29988 messages |
2017-09-04 18:09:58 | ncoghlan | create | |
|