Skip to content

[3.13] gh-132578: Rename the threading.Thread._handle field (GH-132696) #132789

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 3.13
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

@miss-islington miss-islington commented Apr 21, 2025

Commit 0e9c364f introduced the _handle field on instances of
threading.Thread. Unfortunately it's fairly common for subclasses
of threading.Thread to define a _handle() method, which is shadowed
by the new field.
(cherry picked from commit 3cfab44)

Co-authored-by: mpage mpage@meta.com

…H-132696)

Commit `0e9c364f` introduced the `_handle` field on instances of
`threading.Thread`. Unfortunately it's fairly common for subclasses
of `threading.Thread` to define a `_handle()` method, which is shadowed
by the new field.
(cherry picked from commit 3cfab44)

Co-authored-by: mpage <mpage@meta.com>
@Yhg1s
Copy link
Member

Yhg1s commented Apr 21, 2025

Let's hold off on merging this until we've got a clearer picture of the extent of the breakage and the risk of this change. (See #132696 (comment))

@hellypi
Copy link

hellypi commented May 18, 2025

Let's hold off on merging this until we've got a clearer picture of the extent of the breakage and the risk of this change. (See #132696 (comment))

You broke every package that was relying on _handle not being a shadowing, so we are past the stage of worrying about breaking previously unbroken libraries. There currently is a way smaller amount of packages that rely on _handle. I would argue for renaming as soon as possible, since newly created packages are more likely to still be maintained compared to older packages.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants