Yury Selivanov added the comment: > Rather tham monkey-patching, in general I recommend just copying some code from the asyncio library and calling that. In this case you'd be copying a tiny bit of code from create_connection(). You'd still be calling an internal API, _make_ssl_transport(), but your code would still be less likely to change when some part of the asyncio library changes than with monkey-patching.
But this kind of defeats the purpose of pluggable event loop etc. I can't implement all asyncio private APIs for uvloop. Once you start using that, your code can't run on uvloop or any other asyncio implementation. > Maybe it's just culture shock? Or maybe we just need a public API that > roughly represents the pair of calls to _make_ssl_transport() and > _make_socket_transport() that are currently appearing both in > _create_connection_transport() and in _accept_connection2(), plus some of the > code around it that's a little tricky? That's essentially what I wanted `loop.wrap_socket` to do (see msg269519) ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27392> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
