←back to thread

100 points 0x1997 | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.404s | source
1. enricozb ◴[] No.45788158[source]
When reading this project's wiki [0], it mentions that Kanal (another channel implementation) uses an optimization that "makes [the] async API not cancellation-safe". I wonder if this is the same / related issue to the recent HN thread on "future lock" [1]. I hadn't heard of this cancellation safety issue prior to that other HN thread.

[0]: https://github.com/frostyplanet/crossfire-rs/wiki#kanal [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45774086

replies(2): >>45788455 #>>45789568 #
2. paholg ◴[] No.45788455[source]
Futurelock is not about cancellation safety (cancellation is actually one solution to futurelock), though the related issues that are linked in that post are.
3. andrepd ◴[] No.45789568[source]
Cancellation safety is another thing entirely, but one about which there's also an oxide RFD https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/400