refactor(protocol-engine): Rename stop() and pause() -> request_stop() and request_pause() #14879
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is to reflect the apparent reality of what this method is doing.
|
All in favor of the rename, though I'd personally prefer request_stop since I generally prefer verb_noun as function names rather than verb_adverb |
mjhuff
reviewed
Apr 11, 2024
SyntaxColoring
changed the title
sfoster1
approved these changes
Apr 12, 2024
Carlos-fernandez
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2024
…) and request_pause() (#14879) # Overview This fixes something that keeps confusing me as I work on EXEC-382. Various things state that `ProtocolEngine.stop()` takes effect immediately—meaning, to me, that the robot's motion is stopped immediately, the protocol exits immediately, and the HTTP run is marked as `stopped` immediately. This does not seem true. It merely puts the run into a `stop-requested` state, which only later settles into a `stopped` state. This PR adjusts some docstrings and renames `stop()` to ~~`stop_soon()`~~ `request_stop()`. ~~The name `stop_soon()` is inspired by asyncio and anyio's `call_soon()`.~~ `pause()` has the same caveat, so it's renamed to `request_pause()` for consistency. # Test plan None needed. # Review requests * ~~Taking for granted, for a moment, that the `ProtocolEngine` interface has to work like this: is `stop_soon()` a good name? Maybe `request_stop()` would be better?~~ Done. * ~~`pause()` has the same caveat. Do we want to rename that too, for consistency?~~ Done. # Risk assessment No risk.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Overview
This fixes something that keeps confusing me as I work on EXEC-382.
Various things state that
ProtocolEngine.stop()takes effect immediately—meaning, to me, that the robot's motion is stopped immediately, the protocol exits immediately, and the HTTP run is marked asstoppedimmediately. This does not seem true. It merely puts the run into astop-requestedstate, which only later settles into astoppedstate.This PR adjusts some docstrings and renames
stop()tostop_soon()request_stop().The namestop_soon()is inspired by asyncio and anyio'scall_soon().pause()has the same caveat, so it's renamed torequest_pause()for consistency.Test plan
None needed.
Review requests
Taking for granted, for a moment, that theDone.ProtocolEngineinterface has to work like this: isstop_soon()a good name? Mayberequest_stop()would be better?pause()has the same caveat. Do we want to rename that too, for consistency?Risk assessment
No risk.