RetroSearch Browse

Sat Apr 25 07:02:25 CEST 2015 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-April/139528.html

Victor Stinner wrote:

> That's why I suggest to reconsider the idea of supporting an
> *optional* "from __future__ import async" to get async and await as
> keywords in the current file. This import would allow all crazy
> syntax. The parser might suggest to use the import when it fails to
> parse an async or await keyword :-)

To me, these new features *obviously* should require
a __future__ import. Anything else would be crazy.

> I accept the compromise of creating a coroutine object without wait
> for it (obvious and common bug when learning asyncio). Hopefully, we
> keep the coroutine wrapper feature (ok, maybe I suggested this idea to
> Yury because I suffered so much when I learnt how to use asyncio ;-)),
> so it will still be easy to emit a warning in debug mode.

I'm disappointed that there will *still* be no direct and
reliable way to detect and clearly report this kind of
error, and that what there is will only be active in
a special debug mode.

-- 
Greg

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-April/139528.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 492 vs. PEP 3152, new round