Python 3.9's new object resolver + a `str` is much simpler then mucking
with tuples (and easier to serialize). Include a `.to_tuple()` formatter
since we still are passing the module namespace and function name
separately inside the runtime's message format but in theory we might be
able to simplify this depending on how we would change the support for
`enable_modules:list[str]` in the spawn API.
Thanks to @Fuyukai for pointing `resolve_name()` which I didn't know
about before!
Adjust the `soft_wait()` strategy to avoid sending needless cancel
requests if it is known that a child process is already terminated or
does so before the cancel request times out. This should be no slower
and should avoid needless waits on either closure-in-progress or already
closed channels.
Basic strategy is,
- request child actor to cancel
- if process termination is detected, cancel the cancel
- if the process is still alive after a cancel request timeout warn the
user and yield back to the hard reap handling
Better encapsulate all the mem-chan, Queue, sync-primitives inside our
linked task channel in order to avoid `mypy`'s complaints about monkey
patching. This also sets footing for adding an `asyncio`-side channel
API that can be used more like this `trio`-side API.
For whatever reason `trio` seems to be swallowing this exception when
raised in the `trio` task so instead wrap it in our own non-base
exception type: `AsyncioCancelled` and raise that when the `asyncio`
task cancels itself internally using `raise <err> from <src_err>` style.
Further don't bother cancelling the `trio` task (via cancel scope)
since we we can just use the recv mem chan closure error as a signal
and explicitly lookup any set asyncio error.
Wraps the pairs of underlying `trio` mem chans and the `asyncio.Queue`
with this new composite which will be delivered from `open_channel_from()`.
This allows for both sending and receiving values from the `asyncio`
task (2 way msg passing) as well controls for cancelling or waiting on
the task.
Factor `asyncio` translation and re-raising logic into a new closure
which is run on both `trio` side error handling as well as on normal
termination to avoid missing `asyncio` errors even when `trio` task
cancellation is handled first.
Only close the `trio` mem chans on `trio` task termination *iff*
the task was spawned using `open_channel_from()`:
- on `open_channel_from()` exit, mem chan closure is the desired semantic
- on `run_task()` we normally only return a single value or error and
if the channel is closed before the error is raised we may propagate
a `trio.EndOfChannel` instead of the desired underlying `asyncio`
task's error
Pull the common `asyncio` -> `trio` error translation logic into
a common context manager and don't expect a final result to be captured
when using `open_channel_from()` since it's a manager interface and it
would be clunky to try and deliver some "final result" after exit.
Close the mem chan before cancelling the `trio` task in order to ensure
we retrieve whatever error is shuttled from `asyncio` before the channel
read is potentially cancelled (previously a race?).
Handle `asyncio.CancelledError` specially such that we raise it directly
(instead of `raise aio_cancelled from other_err`) since it *is* the
source error in the case where the cancellation is `asyncio` internal.
Clearly this wasn't developed against a task that spawned just an async
func in `asyncio`.. Fix all that and remove a bunch of unnecessary func
layers. Add provisional support for the target receiving the `to_trio`
and `from_trio` channels and for the @tractor.stream marker.
This should mostly maintain top level SC principles for any task spawned
using `tractor.to_asyncio.run()`. When the `asyncio` task completes make
sure to cancel the pertaining `trio` cancel scope and raise any error
that may have resulted. This interface uses `trio`'s "guest-mode" to run
`asyncio` loop using a special entrypoint which is handed to Python
during process spawn.
If the one side of an inter-actor context cancels the other then that
side should always expect back a `ContextCancelled` message. However we
should not set this error in this case (where the cancel request was
sent and a `ContextCancelled` msg was received back) since it may
override some other error that caused the cancellation request to be
sent out in the first place. As an example when a context opens another
context to a peer and some error happens which causes the second peer
context to be cancelled but we want to propagate the original error.
Fixes the issue found in https://github.com/pikers/piker/issues/244
Tyler Goodlet