bpo-33238: Add InvalidStateError to concurrent.futures. #7056
Conversation
Future.set_result and Future.set_exception now raise InvalidStateError if the futures are not pending or running. This mirrors the behavior of asyncio.Future, and prevents AssertionErrors in asyncio.wrap_future when set_result is called multiple times.
|
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 phrase |
Lib/concurrent/futures/_base.py
Outdated
| Should only be used by Executor implementations and unit tests. | ||
| """ | ||
| with self._condition: | ||
| if self._state in [CANCELLED, CANCELLED_AND_NOTIFIED, FINISHED]: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use tuple instead of a list.
By this, the tuple is stored in code object.
List is recreated every time on the function execution.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would normally use a tuple, but went with a list because that's the style the rest of the module used. Should I update the other methods in Future to use tuples?
Lib/concurrent/futures/_base.py
Outdated
| Should only be used by Executor implementations and unit tests. | ||
| """ | ||
| with self._condition: | ||
| if self._state in [CANCELLED, CANCELLED_AND_NOTIFIED, FINISHED]: |
Lib/test/test_concurrent_futures.py
Outdated
| f = create_future(state=PENDING) | ||
| f.set_result(1) | ||
|
|
||
| with self.assertRaises(futures.InvalidStateError): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please use assertRaisesRegex to make sure that error text fits expectation.
Lib/test/test_concurrent_futures.py
Outdated
| e = ValueError() | ||
| f.set_exception(e) | ||
|
|
||
| with self.assertRaises(futures.InvalidStateError): |
|
I have made the requested changes; please review again |
|
@asvetlov The PR looks fine to me now. Could you please take another look? |
|
So will this end up in 3.7.0? I didn't plan for that to happen... but if so, at least the what's new entry must be added. @asvetlov |
|
@1st1, it's your call at the moment. Unless it is backported, it won't be in 3.7.0. If you really think it should be, please make it happen right away so we can get it in 3.7.0b5 which is planned to be tagged very soon. |
|
Well, it's a nice non-critical enhancement, so in my opinion it can wait till 3.8. By no means it should go to 3.7.1 and not to 3.7.0 though. |
|
Ah, this is in master branch only and there's no backport to 3.7, my bad, sorry for the noise. |
|
@jhaydaman Any reason you did not list |
7 participants
Future.set_result and Future.set_exception now raise InvalidStateError
if the futures are not pending or running. This mirrors the behavior
of asyncio.Future, and prevents AssertionErrors in asyncio.wrap_future
when set_result is called multiple times.
https://bugs.python.org/issue33238