This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author yselivanov
Recipients Ron Frederick, asvetlov, gvanrossum, vstinner, yselivanov
Date 2017-12-21.03:54:34
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1513828474.76.0.213398074469.issue25749@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
>  _OR_ adding AbstractServer to the documentation and changing existing references to asyncio.Server to point at asyncio.AbstractServer instead, as that symbol is already exported but is not currently documented.

I completely missed the fact that we already export AbstractServer and that the documentation doesn't actually refer to it, and that it has less APIs than Server.  Thanks for reminding me of that, Ron.  I'll try to address the docs part before 3.7 comes out.

> So, when binding on multiple interfaces there's a requirement that the SAME port be chosen for all of the socket bindings, which can't easily be done today with a single asyncio.Server object. That's a bit off-topic for this issue, though.

And why do you need a single Server object?
History
Date User Action Args
2017-12-21 03:54:34yselivanovsetrecipients: + yselivanov, gvanrossum, vstinner, asvetlov, Ron Frederick
2017-12-21 03:54:34yselivanovsetmessageid: <1513828474.76.0.213398074469.issue25749@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2017-12-21 03:54:34yselivanovlinkissue25749 messages
2017-12-21 03:54:34yselivanovcreate