Skip to content
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

Edit and expand docs for jupyter.widget.control comm channel #3380

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 11, 2022

Conversation

jasongrout
Copy link
Member

This clarifies and expands on the existing documentation.

Copy link
Member

@martinRenou martinRenou left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@martinRenou martinRenou merged commit 421071e into jupyter-widgets:7.x Feb 11, 2022
@ibdafna
Copy link
Member

ibdafna commented Feb 18, 2022

@meeseeksdev please backport to master

meeseeksmachine pushed a commit to meeseeksmachine/ipywidgets that referenced this pull request Feb 18, 2022
ibdafna added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 18, 2022
…0-on-master

Backport PR #3380 on branch master (Edit and expand docs for jupyter.widget.control comm channel)
ibdafna pushed a commit to ibdafna/ipywidgets that referenced this pull request Feb 18, 2022
@maartenbreddels
Copy link
Member

I think we should also have an optional argument, for which Comms to get, or which to skip. I can imagine that if the frontend connects while the kernel is running, it already received a lot of widget data, the only thing left then is to get the missing widgets/Comms. Not something that is required for 8.0, but at least something to keep in mind.

Note: I've seen this a lot doing benchmarks with voila. where we first wait for 90% of the widget data to come in (we missed the first 10%). And then we ask again for all widgets, which is a shame.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants