RetroSearch Browse

Wed Apr 29 02:04:36 CEST 2015 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-April/139598.html

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:

> On 04/28, Yury Selivanov wrote:
>
> >>> This limitation will go away as soon as ``async`` and ``await`` ate
> >>> proper keywords.  Or if it's decided to use a future import for this
> >>> PEP.
>
> `async` and `await` need to be proper keywords, and  __future__ imports
> is how we do that (see, e.g., PEP 355 and and PEP 343)
>

You could at least provide an explanation about how the current proposal
falls short. What code will break? There's a cost to __future__ imports
too. The current proposal is a pretty clever hack -- and we've done similar
hacks in the past (last I remember when "import ... as ..." was introduced
but we didn't want to make 'as' a keyword right away).

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20150428/5def131b/attachment.html>

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-April/139598.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 492: async/await in Python; v3