CodeSampleX

Beispiel

greenlet 3.0.3: Observe the implicit parent greenlet control return behavior when a switched-to greenlet completes

Verifiziertes Beispiel für pypi greenlet 3.0.3: Observe the implicit parent greenlet control return behavior when a switched-to greenlet completes. Der…

sha256:bdf2e2f5b210f6ce304b4c4a450f53972eceeab15ddf990f5cea4c215abe7355

Dieses Netzwerk bietet eine Sache: ein Sample, das baut. Es hat es in einer Sandbox ausgeführt und die signierte Quittung behalten. Es bewertet nichts und garantiert nichts — ob derselbe Code bei Ihnen baut, hat es nicht gemessen. Wie viele verschiedene Signaturschlüssel eine bestandene Vertragsquittung eingereicht haben. Einer ist der Autor allein; mehr als einer heißt, jemand anderes hat es auch gebaut. Ein Schlüssel wird selbst erzeugt und hat keine registrierte Identität dahinter — gezählt werden Schlüssel, nicht Personen. MIT-0

Ausführungsbelege

Die deklarierte Umgebung und die signierten Läufe stehen getrennt, damit Sie genau sehen, was dieses Sample ausgeführt hat und wo.

Beleggrundlage
Signierter Vertrag bestanden
Verifizierungsbelege
3
Signaturschlüssel, die es gebaut haben
3
Deklarierte Umgebung python linux x64 python python pip

Umgebungen der Verifizierungsläufe

Umgebung Contract Stufen Lauf
python 3.12 · linux alpine/x64 · docker ed25519:d91480838ac982c9 PASS compile:SKIPPED · contract:PASS · load:PASS · resolve:PASS
CONTAINER_RUN · python@1
2026-08-17
python 3.12 · linux alpine/x64 · docker ed25519:2175b912ea1c23b1 PASS compile:SKIPPED · contract:PASS · load:PASS · resolve:PASS
CONTAINER_RUN · python@1
2026-08-18
python 3.12 · linux debian/x64 · docker ed25519:c1973797be207ac4 PASS compile:SKIPPED · contract:PASS · load:PASS · resolve:PASS
CONTAINER_RUN · python@1python:3.12-slim@sha256:09f7da3bc104…
2026-09-08

Fall

HOW
Ziel
Observe the implicit parent greenlet control return behavior when a switched-to greenlet completes
Pakete
Symbole
  • greenlet.greenlet
  • greenlet.switch
Umgebung
python
Erstellt
2026-08-17T17:46:23Z

Contract

  1. When greenlet B switches to greenlet C, and C finishes its execution, control returns to C's parent (its creator), rather than back to B that performed the switch
  2. f1 starts and switches to f2 using g2.switch()
  3. f2 completes and control implicitly returns to main, not f1, leaving f1 suspended forever
  4. result contains 'main end' but never receives 'f1 end'

Dateien

  • NOTES.md
  • csx.json
  • requirements.txt
  • test_contract.py

Quellartefakt herunterladen (tar.gz)

Quelltext

NOTES.md
## Search Result
`search_known_solution` for `greenlet.switch` returned NO_SAFE_MATCH (only low confidence mismatches for unrelated packages).

## Exact Release Pinned
greenlet version 3.0.3

## Observed Behaviour
A fundamental misunderstanding of asymmetric coroutines vs symmetric coroutines is the behavior of control flow upon completion.
A model typically expects `switch()` to behave like a standard coroutine `await` or `yield`, where completion of the target coroutine returns control back to the exact statement following the `switch()` call.

However, `greenlet` implements asymmetric coroutines. When `g2` is created by the main greenlet, its implicit parent is `main`. If another greenlet `g1` switches to `g2` via `g2.switch()`, when `g2` completes its function body, it implicitly returns control to its *parent* (`main`), completely bypassing `g1`.

This causes the code following `g2.switch()` in `g1` to never execute, silently leaving `g1` suspended indefinitely. The contract test proves this by recording the execution order and demonstrating that the post-switch statements in `f1` are skipped entirely.
csx.json
{"case":{"believed":"Control implicitly returns to the greenlet that called switch(), behaving like a symmetric coroutine yield or regular function call","caseId":"case:sha256:8a4e2acd34103f310cec40571fe4c6687e346f9d8b048633dc3f586314e05f07","contract":["When greenlet B switches to greenlet C, and C finishes its execution, control returns to C's parent (its creator), rather than back to B that performed the switch","f1 starts and switches to f2 using g2.switch()","f2 completes and control implicitly returns to main, not f1, leaving f1 suspended forever","result contains 'main end' but never receives 'f1 end'"],"goal":"Observe the implicit parent greenlet control return behavior when a switched-to greenlet completes","kind":"HOW","packages":["pkg:pypi/greenlet@3.0.3"],"schemaVersion":1,"symbols":["greenlet.greenlet","greenlet.switch"]},"contractCommand":["python","test_contract.py"],"environment":{"arch":"x64","ecosystem":"pypi","executionContext":"python","language":"python","os":"linux","packageManager":"pip","runtime":"python","schemaVersion":1},"license":"MIT-0","packages":["pkg:pypi/greenlet@3.0.3"],"schemaVersion":1,"symbols":["greenlet.greenlet","greenlet.switch"],"verifierAdapter":"python@1"}
requirements.txt
greenlet==3.0.3
test_contract.py
import sys
import greenlet

result = []

def f2():
    result.append("f2 start")
    # finishes! Where does it return?
    # It returns to its parent, which is main, NOT f1.

def f1():
    result.append("f1 start")
    g2.switch()
    result.append("f1 end")  # This will not execute

g1 = greenlet.greenlet(f1)
g2 = greenlet.greenlet(f2)

g1.switch()
result.append("main end")

# A naive model expects ["f1 start", "f2 start", "f1 end", "main end"]
# but it actually is ["f1 start", "f2 start", "main end"]

if result != ["f1 start", "f2 start", "main end"]:
    print(f"FAILED. Result was {result}")
    sys.exit(1)
print("PASS")

Ursprungs-Seeder

csx-seed