Message311764
| Author | njs |
|---|---|
| Recipients | asvetlov, giampaolo.rodola, njs, yselivanov |
| Date | 2018-02-07.06:08:35 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1517983716.09.0.467229070634.issue32751@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
If a task refuses to be cancelled, then is waiting for it forever actually wrong? That's the same thing as happens if I do 'task.cancel(); await task', right? Currently wait_for will abandon such a task, but then it's still left running in the background indefinitely (creating a memory leak or worse). |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2018-02-07 06:08:36 | njs | set | recipients: + njs, giampaolo.rodola, asvetlov, yselivanov |
| 2018-02-07 06:08:36 | njs | set | messageid: <1517983716.09.0.467229070634.issue32751@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2018-02-07 06:08:36 | njs | link | issue32751 messages |
| 2018-02-07 06:08:35 | njs | create | |