Skip to main content

DeferArgs lets you write syncronous looking functions that really aren't!

So a little side project for my own uses provided a simple decorator that lets me write a function I can pass deferreds and regular arguments to, and have the function return a deferred that fires when all of its deferred arguments are ready and the function has processed them. Some example usage:


@deferargs
def printArgs(*args, **kwargs):
print "Positional Arguments: ", ", ".join(args)
print "Keyword Arguments: ", ", ".join("%r=%s"%(k,v) for (k,v) in kwargs.items())

printArgs("foobar", baz=someNetworkRequest())


Really basic, but it can prove useful for a large portion of Twisted code you might write. I'm planning to add some semi-evil way to do something that looks a lot like a try/except/finally block but is actually (obviously) not, and works with any errbacks from deferreds within the try-like block of code. The reaction has been interesting. I've had some people stand up for the idea, which is similar to
defgen
, and others who think it is a bad idiom that is dangerous to encourage.

Using this kind of abstraction over asyncronous code, you do have to be careful to remember what is asyncronous and take consideration that your code won't run until all deferred arguments are ready, even if some parts could be run with only some of the arguments. In those cases, however, you should just break up the function, and I'd like to note that you can make the same mistakes using deferreds and the like directly, so I don't really see it as an issue.

If you want to do any error handling for the moment, you need to attach errbacks to the deferred from the function call. I want to work in my semi-evil error handling soon, because my goal here is to hide the fact that there are deferreds as much as possible, but for now this is just fine, and I've already had use of it myself.

You can get it from the Cheeseshop, so check it out there now and place any comments about it here.

Filed in:

Comments

Kevin Deenanauth said…
Thanks for this! I think this goes a long way toward making Twisted code more readable (and Pythonic =)

The concerns for this is understandable, but if you know how Twisted works, then there shouldn't be a problem.
Anonymous said…
This is very cool. I don't think it is counter to the way twisted processing flow really works at all.

Popular posts from this blog

Interrupting Coders Isn’t So Bad

Here’s a hot take: disrupting coders isn’t all that bad.

Some disruptions are certainly bad but they usually aren’t. The coder community has overblown the impact. A disruption can be a good thing. How harmful disruption might be a symptom of other problems.

There are different kinds of disruptions. They are caused by other coders on your team, managers and other non-coders, or meetings throughout the day.

The easiest example to debunk is a question from a fellow developer. Imagine someone walks over to your desk or they ping you on Slack, because they have “one quick question.” Do you get annoyed at the interruption when you were in the middle of something important? You help out your teammate quickly and get back to work, trying to pick up where you left off. That’s a kind of interruption we complain about frequently, but I’m not convinced this is all that bad.

You are being disrupted but your team, of which you are only one member of the whole unit, is working smoothly. You unstuck …

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…