Message245125
| Author | ncoghlan |
|---|
| Recipients | Ben.Darnell, Yury.Selivanov, asvetlov, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, scoder, vstinner, yselivanov |
|---|
| Date | 2015-06-10.10:48:17 |
|---|
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
|---|
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
|---|
| Message-id | <CADiSq7dC8ZY8o2FHtkrOdEjidk3wnJ7JDzVLqYgeuoKw6pPL4g@mail.gmail.com> |
|---|
| In-reply-to | <1433913017.8.0.498657279623.issue24400@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
|---|
| Content |
|---|
A couple of high level observations:1. As Yury notes, more clearly separating coroutines and generators is theintent of the PEP. The computer could clearly cope with them being the sameclass, but humans tended to get confused. We were still blurring that linetoo much in the initial implementation, this patch aims to fix that by*really* introducing a separate class for native coroutines.2. Missing integrations in other modules that are likely to result inmisbehaviour in user code (such as the inspect module not accounting forthe new ABCs) are good candidates for filing as behaviour bugs - findingthat kind of gap in PEP implementations is one of the benefits of the betaperiod.3. Integrating nicely with both asyncio and Tornado is a good pragmaticdesign goal to avoid making too many asyncio specific assumptions |
|