[Python-ideas] Async API

[Terry Reedy]

On 10/25/2012 4:51 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
> On 2012-10-25, at 4:39 PM, Terry Reedy
> <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 10/25/2012 12:10 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
>>
>>> - And what's your opinion on writing a PEP about making it
>>> possible to pass a custom socket-factory to stdlib objects?
>>
>> I think this is probably a good idea quite aside from async issues.
>> For one thing, it would make testing with a mock-socket class
>> easier. Issues to decide: name of parameter (should be same for all
>> socket using classes); keyword only? (ditto).
>
> Right, good catch on mocking sockets!
>
> As for the issues: I think that the parameter name should be the
> same/very consistent, and surely keyword-only.

I left out the following issue: should the argument be a 
socket-returning callable (a 'socket-factory' as you called it above) or 
an opened socket?

For files, we variously pass file names to be used with the default 
opener, opened files, and file descriptors, but never an alternate 
opener (such as StringIO). One reason is the the user typically needs a 
handle on the file object in order to later retrieve the contents.

I am not sure that the same applies to sockets. If I ask the ftp module 
to get or send a file, I should not ever need to see the socket used for 
the transport.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy