[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Brian Quinlan added the comment: Committed, thanks for the fix! -- resolution: -> fixed status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 3024ad49f00e by Brian Quinlan in branch 'default': Issue #21362: concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3024ad49f00e -- nosy: +python-dev ___ Pyth

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Brian Quinlan added the comment: The patch looks good to me too. I'll commit it soon. -- assignee: -> bquinlan ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Jim Jewett added the comment: I confirm the bug. The patch looks good. -- nosy: +Jim.Jewett ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-lis

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Changes by Charles-François Natali : -- stage: patch review -> commit review ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Changes by Claudiu.Popa : Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file35058/issue21362_1.patch ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Changes by Florent Xicluna : -- nosy: +flox stage: -> patch review versions: +Python 3.4 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Claudiu.Popa added the comment: Attached patch with improvements suggested by Charles-François Natali. Thank you for the review. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file35057/issue21362.patch ___ Python tracker

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

Claudiu.Popa added the comment: For instance, multiprocessing behaves like this: >>> multiprocessing.Pool(-1) Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in File "C:\Python34\lib\multiprocessing\context.py", line 118, in Pool context=self.get_context()) File "C:\Python34\lib\m

[issue21362] concurrent.futures does not validate that max_workers is proper

New submission from Claudiu.Popa: Due to some bad math on my side, I passed max_workers=0 to concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor. This didn't fail properly, but hanged. The same behaviour occurs in ProcessPoolExecutor, but this time it fails internally with something like this: Exception in