Reflow the gate decision after the rename
Mirror / push (push) Has been cancelled
Test / test (18) (pull_request) Successful in 32s
Test / test (20) (pull_request) Successful in 31s
Test / test (26) (pull_request) Successful in 32s
Test / lint (pull_request) Successful in 23s
Test / test (22) (pull_request) Successful in 31s
Test / test (24) (pull_request) Successful in 31s

This commit is contained in:
2026-09-28 01:48:32 +02:00
parent 669cbde9d0
commit 5e132977f4
+3 -3
View File
@@ -766,9 +766,9 @@ rule and an index of the titles below.
`unbind()` takes through `now()`. The gate is told what happened and never reads back into the
session: a collaborator that has to ask does not own its decision, which is how the first cut ended
up answering the same question two different ways at admit and at release. For the same reason the
retry in `carry()` asks `gate.awaitsNextLink()` rather than `canCarry()`, which also reads the socket — a
condition that loops on something the gate does not gate on spins against a gate that admits it
straight back. `LinkGate.returning` is a copy of `retrying()` taken at teardown, and stays true
retry in `carry()` asks `gate.awaitsNextLink()` rather than `canCarry()`, which also reads the
socket — a condition that loops on something the gate does not gate on spins against a gate that
admits it straight back. `LinkGate.returning` is a copy of `retrying()` taken at teardown, and stays true
only because nothing stops the reconnect loop without `emitClose()` following it: `drain()` and
`end()` are the only callers of `stop()`. A third caller has to shut the gate itself.