Message 356898 - Python tracker
Message356898
| Author | Kentzo |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Kentzo, cjw296, ezio.melotti, jcea, lisroach, lkollar, mariocj89, michael.foord, pitrou, rbcollins, xtreak |
| Date | 2019-11-18.19:03:46 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1574103826.64.0.979162391957.issue17013@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
I have submitted an alternative implementation of this feature heavily inspired by _AwaitEvent I wrote for asynctest [0]. There was recently an interest from the community towards asynctest to the point that got some of its measures merged into CPython [1]. The key features of my implementation [2]: - Gives meaning to the existing Mock.called property, otherwise not much useful - Does not require end users to do anything: change is automatically available in every Mock (and any subclass of mock that does not override `called`) - Use of conditionals provides API that allows much richer extension: instead of hardcoding conditions as events it allows to wait until arbitrary predicate becomes true - Utilizes existing semantics of python conditionals (both asyncio and threading) Accepting this PR will allow me to bring _AwaitEvent thereby completing mock.py with waiting mechanics with identical semantics for both threading-based and asyncio-based cases. 0: https://github.com/Martiusweb/asynctest/blob/4b1284d6bab1ae90a6e8d88b882413ebbb7e5dce/asynctest/mock.py#L428 1: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/9296 2: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/17133 |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2019-11-18 19:03:46 | Kentzo | set | recipients: + Kentzo, jcea, pitrou, rbcollins, cjw296, ezio.melotti, michael.foord, lisroach, mariocj89, lkollar, xtreak |
| 2019-11-18 19:03:46 | Kentzo | set | messageid: <1574103826.64.0.979162391957.issue17013@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| 2019-11-18 19:03:46 | Kentzo | link | issue17013 messages |
| 2019-11-18 19:03:46 | Kentzo | create | |