Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix: some specs rely on Fiber.yield behavior #6953
Fix: some specs rely on Fiber.yield behavior #6953
Changes from 1 commit
d623176
f478f35
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Related to #6948 : I'd expect
ch.send
to raise here since it couldn't deliver the value.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Commented in the issue. I think raising only in the second send is the right thing.
I would leave the rescue block to catch upon the second send.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is changing the spec to run with buffered channel to an unbuffered.
Is there any reason for that change other than buffered channel of size 1 seems to be an unbuffered channel?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
An unbuffered channel is synchronous, so it forces main/fiber to sync as we expect it. Unlike Buffered that are async.
Unrelated to this PR, but I think both buffered/unbuffered should have both (a)synchronous modes —in fact, I would have just buffered channels with a blocking argument to select sync/async.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, it's true the behavior is different. And that change does not affect the spec.
I think is more clear to have the async/sync nature in the type and not in the type argument.