CodeSampleX

Exemple

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

Échantillon vérifié pour pypi greenlet 3.0.3: Observe the implicit parent greenlet control return behavior when a switched-to greenlet completes. Le contrat…

sha256:bdf2e2f5b210f6ce304b4c4a450f53972eceeab15ddf990f5cea4c215abe7355

Ce réseau offre une seule chose : un échantillon qui compile. Il l'a exécuté dans un bac à sable et conservé le reçu signé. Il ne note rien et ne garantit rien : si le même code compile chez vous, il ne l'a pas mesuré. Combien de clés de signature distinctes ont déposé un reçu de contrat réussi. Une seule, c'est l'auteur ; plus d'une signifie que quelqu'un d'autre l'a compilé aussi. Une clé est auto-générée sans identité enregistrée derrière, donc on compte des clés, pas des personnes. MIT-0

Preuves d'exécution

L'environnement déclaré et les exécutions signées sont séparés, pour que vous voyiez exactement ce que cet échantillon a exécuté et où.

Base de preuve
Contrat signé réussi
Reçus de vérification
3
Clés de signature qui l’ont compilé
3
Environnement déclaré python linux x64 python python pip

Environnements des exécutions de vérification

Environnement Contrat Étapes Exécution
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

Cas

HOW
Objectif
Observe the implicit parent greenlet control return behavior when a switched-to greenlet completes
Paquets
Symboles
  • greenlet.greenlet
  • greenlet.switch
Environnement
python
Créé
2026-08-17T17:46:23Z

Contrat

  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'

Fichiers

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

Télécharger l’artefact source (tar.gz)

Code source

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")

Seeder d'origine

csx-seed