issue_comments: 447517019

This data as json

html_url issue_url id node_id user created_at updated_at author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2595#issuecomment-447517019 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2595 447517019 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0NzUxNzAxOQ== 1217238 2018-12-15T00:20:40Z 2018-12-15T00:20:40Z MEMBER

Yeah, it's not really any additional trouble. I plan to include this in a v0.11.1 release, which will be the last release to support Python 2. On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 4:12 PM Joe Hamman notifications@github.com wrote:

@jhamman commented on this pull request.

In xarray/backends/locks.py https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2595#discussion_r241925201:

  • Includes backwards compatibility hacks for old versions of Python, dask
  • and dask-distributed.
  • """
  • if blocking:

  • no arguments needed

  • return lock.acquire()
  • elif DistributedLock is not None and isinstance(lock, DistributedLock):

  • distributed.Lock doesn't support the blocking argument yet:

  • https://github.com/dask/distributed/pull/2412

  • return lock.acquire(timeout=0)
  • else:

  • "blocking" keyword argument not supported for:

  • - threading.Lock on Python 2.

  • - dask.SerializableLock with dask v1.0.0 or earlier.

  • - multiprocessing.Lock calls the argument "block" instead.

  • return lock.acquire(blocking)

Given the date, do you think its useful here to consider this Python 2 work around? I guess its the same work-around as the dask/multiprocessing issue.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2595#pullrequestreview-185327940, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABKS1iwt7OmehxX6coNie-LtSI3YJnhhks5u5D57gaJpZM4ZJ6GX . 

{
    "total_count": 1,
    "+1": 1,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   388977754