-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.1k
Tracking Issue for poll_ready #72992
Copy link
Copy link
Closed
Labels
A-async-awaitArea: Async & AwaitArea: Async & AwaitC-tracking-issueCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFCCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFCT-libs-apiRelevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
A-async-awaitArea: Async & AwaitArea: Async & AwaitC-tracking-issueCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFCCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFCT-libs-apiRelevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Type
Fields
Give feedbackNo fields configured for issues without a type.
This is a tracking issue for
Poll::ready()(PR #72994).The feature gate for the issue is
#![feature(poll_ready)].Steps
Rationale: I have this code in Quinn:
And this would seem quite a bit nicer:
One potential downside is that this adds one more
ready()afterfutures::ready!()andfutures::future::ready(). As it is a method (compared to a free function or a macro), it seems it's still clearly distinct, but could be confusing. It otherwise seems to be the idiomatic naming choice though.