Introduce async alternatives in the client command hierarchy #121
Conversation
|
@ldoktor This is just a very drafty idea and I am just curious about your opinion in general and for alternatives in case there are obvious one I have definitely missed. |
TODO: Consider best approach here and in the topmost nonblocking reading and whether there is enough demand for this extension.
TODO: Is shorter or longer timeout in the new location better?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hello @pevogam, it looks nice, I wouldn't be oppose to this, but I wouldn't benefit of it either. I played with asyncio briefly a while ago and found out it's not useful for tasks I'm using aexpect for (I liked it's usage in interactive games, looked clear there, but with regards to testing it seems too strict to not-really-educated me)
So my main question would be, do you plan to or know someone who would be using this API and would be willing to address potential issues?
@lmr @clebergnu what are your opinions?
Indeed there is a background for the idea - a remote test spawner introduced in avocado-framework/avocado#5621 that makes use of aexpect. There are however ways to do it also without aexpect having asyncio capabilities but you can see the earlier commits there for an example.
Feel free to compare with the pull request too regarding use cases for some source of details. |
TODO: Consider best approach here and in the topmost nonblocking reading.