[issue34852] Counter-intuitive behavior of Server.close() / wait_closed()

Aymeric Augustin added the comment: Would it make sense to add `await asyncio.sleep(0)` in `Server.wait_closed()` to ensure that all connections reach `connection_made()` before `wait_closed()` returns? This would be fragile but it would be an improvement over the current behavior, wouldn't

[issue34852] Counter-intuitive behavior of Server.close() / wait_closed()

Change by Chris Jerdonek : -- nosy: +chris.jerdonek ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://m

[issue34852] Counter-intuitive behavior of Server.close() / wait_closed()

Aymeric Augustin added the comment: For now I will use the following hack: server.close() await server.wait_closed() # Workaround for wait_closed() not quite doing # what I want. await asyncio.sleep(0) # I believe that all accepted connections have reached # conne

[issue34852] Counter-intuitive behavior of Server.close() / wait_closed()

New submission from Aymeric Augustin : **Summary** 1. Is it correct for `Server.wait_closed()` (as implemented in asyncio) to be a no-op after `Server.close()`? 2. How can I tell that all incoming connections have been received by `connection_made()` after `Server.close()`? **Details** Afte