Author bwhmather
Recipients Nathaniel Manista, asvetlov, bquinlan, bwhmather, gregory.p.smith, pitrou
Date 2017-10-03.08:53:58
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1507020839.22.0.213398074469.issue22729@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
The patch is indeed a little outdated, but I would be happy to pick it and get it working again.

First we need a resolution to #22630 though.
Currently calling `cancel` will invoke callbacks, but waiters won't be triggered until `set_running_or_notify_cancel` is called.

If both are implemented using the same mechanism, then both will need to be cancelled at the same time.  This means that the behaviour of one the other will need to be changed in a backwards incompatible way.

Does anyone have a preference for where we should send notification of cancellation?
Is the breakage significant enough to kill this patch?
History
Date User Action Args
2017-10-03 08:53:59bwhmathersetrecipients: + bwhmather, gregory.p.smith, bquinlan, pitrou, asvetlov, Nathaniel Manista
2017-10-03 08:53:59bwhmathersetmessageid: <1507020839.22.0.213398074469.issue22729@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2017-10-03 08:53:59bwhmatherlinkissue22729 messages
2017-10-03 08:53:58bwhmathercreate