Synchronous Driver Actions Solution to README #106
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
Feel many people will require synchronous solution to requests prior to response parsing to ensure best compatibility with scrapy design which keeps response parsing and request asynchronous. This utilizes the wait_until to perform any driver actions prior to response formation. Could be useful to people so maybe include as use case in README? Also, there may be potential to create a wrapper that does this more user friendly, but for now this good maybe.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Feel many people will require synchronous solution to requests prior to response parsing to ensure best compatibility with scrapy design which keeps response parsing and request asynchronous. This utilizes the wait_until to perform any driver actions prior to response formation. Could be useful to people so maybe include as use case in README? Also, there may be potential to create a wrapper that does this more user friendly, but for now this good maybe.