Skip to content
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

rm: threaded subprocs #4634

Draft
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jnoortheen
Copy link
Member

@jnoortheen jnoortheen commented Jan 10, 2022

subprocess handling without threads, the aim is to solve various thread related issues like suspending/resuming and not using threads for capturing outputs.

Todos:

  • backgrounding
  • piping
  • remove predictable threading

Related

#2159

For community

⬇️ Please click the 👍 reaction instead of leaving a +1 or 👍 comment

@jnoortheen jnoortheen marked this pull request as draft January 10, 2022 12:22
@Techcable
Copy link

Techcable commented Jan 28, 2022

Wait is this the new default? Please make it behind a config flag in case it ever breaks.

The old threaded subprocess were really buggy. I'm fine if it's on by default I just want a fallback

@jnoortheen
Copy link
Member Author

The idea was to remove unthreading/threading behaviour without any disruptions. It will not be merged until then. It needs to be feature compatible, and also this is just at the start.

@jnoortheen jnoortheen added this to the 0.13.0 milestone Apr 15, 2022
@jnoortheen jnoortheen removed this from the 0.13.0 milestone May 2, 2022
@jnoortheen jnoortheen changed the title feat: add AsyncProc class rm: threaded subprocs Nov 12, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

Warning! No news item is found for this PR.
If this is an user facing change/feature/fix, please add a news item by copying the format from news/TEMPLATE.rst.

@jnoortheen
Copy link
Member Author

related discussion #4710

@jnoortheen jnoortheen mentioned this pull request Feb 22, 2023
3 tasks
@anki-code
Copy link
Member

Hey @jnoortheen! It looks like it's great work! Please open issue for talking instead of "Discussion". Do you plan to continue work or where you stopped?

@jnoortheen
Copy link
Member Author

I am not working on it currently. I rarely face errors related to this as I dont use cmd capturing. I will probably work on it iin future.

@jnoortheen
Copy link
Member Author

found an earlier attempt here main...nothread

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants