2012-12-12 20:35:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
PEP: 3156
|
|
|
|
|
Title: Asynchronous IO Support Rebooted
|
|
|
|
|
Version: $Revision$
|
|
|
|
|
Last-Modified: $Date$
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org>
|
|
|
|
|
Status: Draft
|
|
|
|
|
Type: Standards Track
|
|
|
|
|
Content-Type: text/x-rst
|
|
|
|
|
Created: 12-Dec-2012
|
|
|
|
|
Post-History: TBD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
========
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-12 23:26:20 -05:00
|
|
|
|
This is a proposal for asynchronous I/O in Python 3, starting with
|
2012-12-12 20:35:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Python 3.3. Consider this the concrete proposal that is missing from
|
|
|
|
|
PEP 3153. The proposal includes a pluggable event loop API, transport
|
|
|
|
|
and protocol abstractions similar to those in Twisted, and a
|
|
|
|
|
higher-level scheduler based on yield-from (PEP 380). A reference
|
|
|
|
|
implementation is in the works under the code name tulip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introduction
|
|
|
|
|
============
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-12 21:30:32 -05:00
|
|
|
|
The event loop is the place where most interoperability occurs. It
|
|
|
|
|
should be easy for (Python 3.3 ports of) frameworks like Twisted,
|
|
|
|
|
Tornado, or ZeroMQ to either adapt the default event loop
|
|
|
|
|
implementation to their needs using a lightweight wrapper or proxy, or
|
|
|
|
|
to replace the default event loop implementation with an adaptation of
|
|
|
|
|
their own event loop implementation. (Some frameworks, like Twisted,
|
|
|
|
|
have multiple event loop implementations. This should not be a
|
|
|
|
|
problem since these all have the same interface.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It should even be possible for two different third-party frameworks to
|
|
|
|
|
interoperate, either by sharing the default event loop implementation
|
|
|
|
|
(each using its own adapter), or by sharing the event loop
|
|
|
|
|
implementation of either framework. In the latter case two levels of
|
|
|
|
|
adaptation would occur (from framework A's event loop to the standard
|
|
|
|
|
event loop interface, and from there to framework B's event loop).
|
|
|
|
|
Which event loop implementation is used should be under control of the
|
|
|
|
|
main program (though a default policy for event loop selection is
|
|
|
|
|
provided).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thus, two separate APIs are defined:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- getting and setting the current event loop object
|
|
|
|
|
- the interface of a conforming event loop and its minimum guarantees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An event loop implementation may provide additional methods and
|
|
|
|
|
guarantees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The event loop interface does not depend on yield-from. Rather, it
|
|
|
|
|
uses a combination of callbacks, additional interfaces (transports and
|
|
|
|
|
protocols), and Futures. The latter are similar to those defined in
|
|
|
|
|
PEP 3148, but have a different implementation and are not tied to
|
|
|
|
|
threads. In particular, they have no wait() method; the user is
|
|
|
|
|
expected to use callbacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For users (like myself) who don't like using callbacks, a scheduler is
|
|
|
|
|
provided for writing asynchronous I/O code as coroutines using the PEP
|
|
|
|
|
380 yield-from expressions. The scheduler is not pluggable;
|
|
|
|
|
pluggability occurs at the event loop level, and the scheduler should
|
|
|
|
|
work with any conforming event loop implementation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For interoperability between code written using coroutines and other
|
|
|
|
|
async frameworks, the scheduler has a Task class that behaves like a
|
|
|
|
|
Future. A framework that interoperates at the event loop level can
|
|
|
|
|
wait for a Future to complete by adding a callback to the Future.
|
|
|
|
|
Likewise, the scheduler offers an operation to suspend a coroutine
|
|
|
|
|
until a callback is called.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited interoperability with threads is provided by the event loop
|
|
|
|
|
interface; there is an API to submit a function to an executor (see
|
|
|
|
|
PEP 3148) which returns a Future that is compatible with the event
|
|
|
|
|
loop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-goals
|
|
|
|
|
=========
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interoperability with systems like Stackless Python or
|
|
|
|
|
greenlets/gevent is not a goal of this PEP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specification
|
|
|
|
|
=============
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-12 23:26:20 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Dependencies
|
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Python 3.3 is required. No new language or standard library features
|
|
|
|
|
beyond Python 3.3 are required. No third-party modules or packages
|
|
|
|
|
are required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Module Namespace
|
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The specification here will live in a new toplevel package. Different
|
|
|
|
|
components will live in separate submodules of that package. The
|
|
|
|
|
package will import common APIs from their respective submodules and
|
|
|
|
|
make them available as package attributes (similar to the way the
|
|
|
|
|
email package works).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The name of the toplevel package is currently unspecified. The
|
|
|
|
|
reference implementation uses the name 'tulip', but the name will
|
|
|
|
|
change to something more boring if and when the implementation is
|
|
|
|
|
moved into the standard library (hopefully for Python 3.4).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Until the boring name is chosen, this PEP will use 'tulip' as the
|
|
|
|
|
toplevel package name. Classes and functions given without a module
|
|
|
|
|
name are assumed to be accessed via the toplevel package.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Event Loop Policy: Getting and Setting the Event Loop
|
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------
|
2012-12-12 23:26:20 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To get the current event loop, use ``get_event_loop()``. This returns
|
|
|
|
|
an instance of the ``EventLoop`` class defined below or an equivalent
|
|
|
|
|
object. It is possible that ``get_event_loop()`` returns a different
|
|
|
|
|
object depending on the current thread, or depending on some other
|
|
|
|
|
notion of context.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To set the current event loop, use ``set_event_loop(eventloop)``,
|
|
|
|
|
where ``eventloop`` is an instance of the ``EventLoop`` class or
|
|
|
|
|
equivalent. This uses the same notion of context as
|
|
|
|
|
``get_event_loop()``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To change the way ``get_event_loop()`` and ``set_event_loop()`` work
|
|
|
|
|
(including their notion of context), call
|
|
|
|
|
``set_event_loop_policy(policy)``, where ``policy`` is an event loop
|
|
|
|
|
policy object. The policy object can be any object that has methods
|
|
|
|
|
``get_event_loop()`` and ``set_event_loop(eventloop)`` behaving like
|
|
|
|
|
the functions described above. The default event loop policy is an
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
instance of the class ``DefaultEventLoopPolicy``. The current event loop
|
2012-12-12 23:26:20 -05:00
|
|
|
|
policy object can be retrieved by calling ``get_event_loop_policy()``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
An event loop policy may but does not have to enforce that there is
|
|
|
|
|
only one event loop in existence. The default event loop policy does
|
|
|
|
|
not enforce this, but it does enforce that there is only one event
|
|
|
|
|
loop per thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-12 23:26:20 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Event Loop Interface
|
|
|
|
|
--------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
A conforming event loop object has the following methods:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Look for a better way to format method docs. PEP 12 doesn't seem to
|
|
|
|
|
have one. PEP 418 uses ^^^, which makes sub-headings. PEP 3148
|
|
|
|
|
uses a markup which generates rather heavy layout using blockquote,
|
|
|
|
|
causing a blank line between each method heading and its
|
|
|
|
|
description. Also think of adding subheadings for different
|
|
|
|
|
categories of methods.
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``run()``. Runs the event loop until there is nothing left to do.
|
|
|
|
|
This means, in particular:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- No more calls scheduled with ``call_later()`` (except for canceled
|
|
|
|
|
calls).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- No more registered file descriptors. It is up to the registering
|
|
|
|
|
party to unregister a file descriptor when it is closed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
- TBD: Do we need an API for stopping the event loop, given that we
|
|
|
|
|
have the termination condition? Is the termination condition
|
|
|
|
|
compatible with other frameworks?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- TBD: Do we need an API to run the event loop for a little while
|
|
|
|
|
(e.g. a single iteration)? If so, exactly what should it do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
- ``call_later(when, callback, *args)``. Arrange for
|
|
|
|
|
``callback(*args)`` to be called approximately ``when`` seconds in
|
|
|
|
|
the future, once, unless canceled. As usual in Python, ``when`` may
|
|
|
|
|
be a floating point number to represent smaller intervals. Returns
|
|
|
|
|
a ``DelayedCall`` object representing the callback, whose
|
|
|
|
|
``cancel()`` method can be used to cancel the callback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``call_soon(callback, *args)``. Equivalent to ``call_later(0,
|
|
|
|
|
callback, *args)``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``call_soon_threadsafe(callback, *args)``. Like
|
|
|
|
|
``call_soon(callback, *args)``, but when called from another thread
|
|
|
|
|
while the event loop is blocked waiting for I/O, unblocks the event
|
2012-12-13 14:05:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
loop. This is the *only* method that is safe to call from another
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
thread or from a signal handler. (To schedule a callback for a
|
|
|
|
|
later time in a threadsafe manner, you can use
|
|
|
|
|
``ev.call_soon_threadsafe(ev.call_later, when, callback, *args)``.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
- TBD: A way to register a callback that is already wrapped in a
|
|
|
|
|
``DelayedCall``. Maybe ``call_soon()`` could just check
|
|
|
|
|
``isinstance(callback, DelayedCall)``? It should silently skip
|
|
|
|
|
a canceled callback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 14:05:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Some methods return Futures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``wrap_future(future)``. This takes a PEP 3148 Future (i.e., an
|
|
|
|
|
instance of ``concurrent.futures.Future``) and returns a Future
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
compatible with the event loop (i.e., a ``tulip.Future`` instance).
|
2012-12-13 14:05:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``run_in_executor(executor, function, *args)``. Arrange to call
|
|
|
|
|
``function(*args)`` in an executor (see PEP 3148). Returns a Future
|
|
|
|
|
whose result on success is the return value that call. This is
|
|
|
|
|
equivalent to ``wrap_future(executor.submit(function, *args))``. If
|
|
|
|
|
``executor`` is ``None``, a default ``ThreadPoolExecutor`` with 5
|
|
|
|
|
threads is used. (TBD: Should the default executor be shared
|
|
|
|
|
between different event loops? Should we even have a default
|
|
|
|
|
executor? Should be be able to set its thread count? Shoul we even
|
|
|
|
|
have this method?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``getaddrinfo(host, port, family=0, type=0, proto=0, flags=0)``.
|
|
|
|
|
Similar to the ``socket.getaddrinfo()`` function but returns a
|
|
|
|
|
Future. The Future's result on success will be a list of the same
|
|
|
|
|
format as returned by ``socket.getaddrinfo()``. The default
|
|
|
|
|
implementation calls ``socket.getaddrinfo()`` using
|
|
|
|
|
``run_in_executor()``, but other implementations may choose to
|
|
|
|
|
implement their own DNS lookup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``getnameinfo(sockaddr, flags)``. Similar to
|
|
|
|
|
``socket.getnameinfo()`` but returns a Future. The Future's result
|
|
|
|
|
on success will be a tuple ``(host, port)``. Same implementation
|
|
|
|
|
remarks as for ``getaddrinfo()``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``create_transport(...)``. Creates a transport. Returns a Future.
|
|
|
|
|
TBD: Signature. Do we pass in a protocol or protocol class?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``start_serving(...)``. Enters a loop that accepts connections.
|
|
|
|
|
TBD: Signature. This definitely takes a protocol class. Do we pass
|
|
|
|
|
in a non-blocking socket that's already bound and listening, or do
|
|
|
|
|
we pass in arguments that let it create and configure the socket
|
|
|
|
|
properly? (E.g. the event loop may know a better default backlog
|
|
|
|
|
value for ``listen()`` than the typical application developer.)
|
|
|
|
|
TBD: What does it return? Something we can use to stop accepting
|
|
|
|
|
without stopping the event loop? A Future that completes when the
|
|
|
|
|
socket is successfully accepting connections?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 10:54:08 -05:00
|
|
|
|
The following methods for registering callbacks for file descriptors
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
are optional. If they are not implemented, accessing the method
|
|
|
|
|
(without calling it) returns AttributeError. The default
|
|
|
|
|
implementation provides them but the user normally doesn't use these
|
|
|
|
|
directly -- they are used by the transport implementations
|
|
|
|
|
exclusively. Also, on Windows these may be present or not depending
|
|
|
|
|
on whether a select-based or IOCP-based event loop is used. These
|
|
|
|
|
take integer file descriptors only, not objects with a fileno()
|
|
|
|
|
method. The file descriptor should represent something pollable --
|
|
|
|
|
i.e. no disk files.
|
2012-12-13 10:54:08 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
- ``add_reader(fd, callback, *args)``. Arrange for
|
|
|
|
|
``callback(*args)`` to be called whenever file descriptor ``fd`` is
|
|
|
|
|
ready for reading. Returns a ``DelayedCall`` object which can be
|
|
|
|
|
used to cancel the callback. Note that, unlike ``call_later()``,
|
|
|
|
|
the callback may be called many times. Calling ``add_reader()``
|
|
|
|
|
again for the same file descriptor implicitly cancels the previous
|
|
|
|
|
callback for that file descriptor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``add_writer(fd, callback, *args)``. Like ``add_reader()``,
|
|
|
|
|
but registers the callback for writing instead of for reading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``remove_reader(fd)``. Cancels the current read callback for file
|
|
|
|
|
descriptor ``fd``, if one is set. A no-op if no callback is
|
|
|
|
|
currently set for the file descriptor. (The reason for providing
|
|
|
|
|
this alternate interface is that it is often more convenient to
|
|
|
|
|
remember the file descriptor than to remember the ``DelayedCall``
|
|
|
|
|
object.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``remove_writer(fd)``. This is to ``add_writer()`` as
|
|
|
|
|
``remove_reader()`` is to ``add_reader()``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
The following methods for doing async I/O on sockets are optional.
|
|
|
|
|
They are alternative to the previous set of optional methods, intended
|
|
|
|
|
for transport implementations on Windows using IOCP (if the event loop
|
|
|
|
|
supports it). The socket argument has to be a non-blocking socket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``sock_recv(sock, n)``. Receive up to ``n`` bytes from socket
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
``sock``. Returns a Future whose result on success will be a
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
bytes object on success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``sock_sendall(sock, data)``. Send bytes ``data`` to the socket
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
``sock``. Returns a Future whose result on success will be
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
``None``. (TBD: Is it better to emulate ``sendall()`` or ``send()``
|
|
|
|
|
semantics?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``sock_connect(sock, address)``. Connect to the given address.
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Returns a Future whose result on success will be ``None``.
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``sock_accept(sock)``. Accept a connection from a socket. The
|
|
|
|
|
socket must be in listening mode and bound to an address. Returns a
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Future whose result on success will be a tuple ``(conn, peer)``
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
where ``conn`` is a connected non-blocking socket and ``peer`` is
|
2012-12-13 14:05:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
the peer address. (TBD: People tell me that this style of API is
|
|
|
|
|
too slow for high-volume servers. So there's also
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
``start_serving()`` above. Then do we still need this?)
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Callback Sequencing
|
|
|
|
|
-------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When two callbacks are scheduled for the same time, they are run
|
|
|
|
|
in the order in which they are registered. For example::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ev.call_soon(foo)
|
|
|
|
|
ev.call_soon(bar)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
guarantees that ``foo()`` is called before ``bar()``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
If ``call_soon()`` is used, this guarantee is true even if the system
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
clock were to run backwards. This is also the case for
|
|
|
|
|
``call_later(0, callback, *args)``. However, if ``call_later()`` is
|
|
|
|
|
used with a nonzero ``when`` argument, all bets are off if the system
|
|
|
|
|
clock were to runs backwards. (A good event loop implementation
|
|
|
|
|
should use ``time.monotonic()`` to avoid problems when the clock runs
|
|
|
|
|
backward. See PEP 418.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Context
|
|
|
|
|
-------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All event loops have a notion of context. For the default event loop
|
|
|
|
|
implementation, the context is a thread. An event loop implementation
|
|
|
|
|
should run all callbacks in the same context. An event loop
|
|
|
|
|
implementation should run only one callback at a time, so callbacks
|
|
|
|
|
can assume automatic mutual exclusion with other callbacks scheduled
|
|
|
|
|
in the same event loop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The DelayedCall Class
|
|
|
|
|
---------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
The various methods for registering callbacks (e.g. ``call_later()``)
|
|
|
|
|
all return an object representing the registration that can be used to
|
|
|
|
|
cancel the callback. For want of a better name this object is called
|
|
|
|
|
a ``DelayedCall``, although the user never needs to instantiate
|
|
|
|
|
instances of this class. There is one public method:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``cancel()``. Attempt to cancel the callback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Read-only public attributes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``callback``. The callback function to be called.
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
- ``args``. The argument tuple with which to call the callback function.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``canceled``. True if ``cancel()`` has been called.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note that some callbacks (e.g. those registered with ``call_later()``)
|
|
|
|
|
are meant to be called only once. Others (e.g. those registered with
|
|
|
|
|
``add_reader()``) are meant to be called multiple times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TBD: An API to call the callback (encapsulating the exception handling
|
|
|
|
|
necessary)? Should it record how many times it has been called?
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe this API should just be ``__call__()``? (But it should suppress
|
|
|
|
|
exceptions.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TBD: Public attribute recording the realtime value when the callback
|
|
|
|
|
is scheduled? (Since this is needed anyway for storing it in a heap.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TBD: A better name for the class?
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Futures
|
|
|
|
|
-------
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
The ``tulip.Future`` class here is intentionally similar to the
|
|
|
|
|
``concurrent.futures.Future`` class specified by PEP 3148, but there
|
|
|
|
|
are slight differences. The supported public API is as follows,
|
|
|
|
|
indicating the differences with PEP 3148:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``cancel()``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``cancelled()``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``running()``. Note that the meaning of this method is essentially
|
|
|
|
|
"cannot be cancelled and isn't done yet".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``done()``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``result()``. Difference with PEP 3148: This has no timeout
|
|
|
|
|
argument and does *not* wait; if the future is not yet done, it
|
|
|
|
|
raises an exception.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``exception()``. Difference with PEP 3148: This has no timeout
|
|
|
|
|
argument and does *not* wait; if the future is not yet done, it
|
|
|
|
|
raises an exception.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- ``add_done_callback(fn)``. Difference with PEP 3148: The callback
|
|
|
|
|
is never called immediately, and always in the context of the
|
|
|
|
|
caller. (Typically, a context is a thread.) You can think of this
|
|
|
|
|
as calling the callback through ``call_soon_threadsafe()``. Note
|
|
|
|
|
that the callback (unlike all other callbacks defined in this PEP)
|
|
|
|
|
is always called with a single argument, the Future object.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The internal methods defined in PEP 3148 are not supported.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A ``tulip.Future`` object is not acceptable to the ``wait()`` and
|
|
|
|
|
``as_completed()`` functions in the ``concurrent.futures`` package.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A ``tulip.Future`` object is acceptable to a yield-from expression
|
|
|
|
|
when used in a coroutine. See the section "Coroutines and the
|
|
|
|
|
Scheduler" below.
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transports
|
|
|
|
|
----------
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-12 21:30:32 -05:00
|
|
|
|
TBD.
|
2012-12-12 20:35:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Protocols
|
|
|
|
|
---------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TBD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coroutines and the Scheduler
|
|
|
|
|
----------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TBD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Callback Style
|
|
|
|
|
--------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most interfaces taking a callback also take positional arguments. For
|
|
|
|
|
instance, to arrange for ``foo("abc", 42)`` to be called soon, you
|
|
|
|
|
call ``ev.call_soon(foo, "abc", 42)``. To schedule the call
|
|
|
|
|
``foo()``, use ``ev.call_soon(foo)``. This convention greatly reduces
|
|
|
|
|
the number of small lambdas required in typical callback programming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 14:05:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
This convention specifically does *not* support keyword arguments.
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Keyword arguments are used to pass optional extra information about
|
|
|
|
|
the callback. This allows graceful evolution of the API without
|
|
|
|
|
having to worry about whether a keyword might be significant to a
|
2012-12-13 14:05:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
callee somewhere. If you have a callback that *must* be called with a
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
keyword argument, you can use a lambda or ``functools.partial``. For
|
|
|
|
|
example::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ev.call_soon(functools.partial(foo, "abc", repeat=42))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Choosing an Event Loop Implementation
|
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TBD. (This is about the choice to use e.g. select vs. poll vs. epoll,
|
|
|
|
|
and how to override the choice. Probably belongs in the event loop
|
|
|
|
|
policy.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Open Issues
|
|
|
|
|
===========
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 14:58:47 -05:00
|
|
|
|
- How to spell the past tense of 'cancel'? American usage prefers
|
|
|
|
|
(though not absolutely dictates) 'canceled' (one ell), but outside
|
|
|
|
|
the US 'cancelled' (two ells) prevails. PEP 3148, whose author
|
|
|
|
|
currently lives in Australia, uses ``cancelled()`` as a method name
|
|
|
|
|
on its Future class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Do we need introspection APIs? E.g. asking for the read callback
|
|
|
|
|
given a file descriptor. Or when the next scheduled call is. Or
|
|
|
|
|
the list of file descriptors registered with callbacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
- Should we have ``future.add_callback(callback, *args)``, using the
|
|
|
|
|
convention from the section "Callback Style" above, or should we
|
|
|
|
|
stick with the PEP 3148 specification of
|
|
|
|
|
``future.add_done_callback(callback)`` which calls
|
|
|
|
|
``callback(future)``? (Glyph suggested using a different method
|
|
|
|
|
name since add_done_callback() does not guarantee that the callback
|
|
|
|
|
will be called in the right context.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
- Returning a Future is relatively expensive, and it is quite possible
|
2012-12-13 14:05:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
that some types of calls *usually* complete immediately
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
(e.g. writing small amounts of data to a socket). A trick used by
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Oudkerk in the tulip project's proactor branch makes calls
|
2012-12-13 14:05:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
like recv() either return a regular result or *raise* a Future. The
|
2012-12-13 13:30:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
caller (likely a transport) must then write code like this::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
try:
|
|
|
|
|
res = ev.sock_recv(sock, 8192)
|
|
|
|
|
except Future as f:
|
|
|
|
|
yield from sch.block_future(f)
|
|
|
|
|
res = f.result()
|
2012-12-13 01:47:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
2012-12-12 20:35:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acknowledgments
|
|
|
|
|
===============
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apart from PEP 3153, influences include PEP 380 and Greg Ewing's
|
|
|
|
|
tutorial for yield-from, Twisted, Tornado, ZeroMQ, pyftpdlib, tulip
|
|
|
|
|
(the author's attempts at synthesis of all these), wattle (Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Dower's counter-proposal), numerous discussions on python-ideas from
|
|
|
|
|
September through December 2012, a Skype session with Steve Dower and
|
2012-12-12 21:30:32 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Dino Viehland, email exchanges with Ben Darnell, an audience with
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Provos (original author of libevent), and two in-person meetings
|
|
|
|
|
with several Twisted developers, including Glyph, Brian Warner, David
|
|
|
|
|
Reid, and Duncan McGreggor.
|
2012-12-12 20:35:17 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright
|
|
|
|
|
=========
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This document has been placed in the public domain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..
|
|
|
|
|
Local Variables:
|
|
|
|
|
mode: indented-text
|
|
|
|
|
indent-tabs-mode: nil
|
|
|
|
|
sentence-end-double-space: t
|
|
|
|
|
fill-column: 70
|
|
|
|
|
coding: utf-8
|
|
|
|
|
End:
|