[Python-Dev] async/await in Python; v2 (original) (raw)
Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Thu Apr 23 02:35:18 CEST 2015
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] async/await in Python; v2
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] async/await in Python; v2
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, > OTOH I'm still struggling with what you have to do to wrap a coroutine in a Task, the way its done in asyncio by the Task() constructor, the loop.createtask() method, and the async() function
That's easy. You can always use costart() to adapt a cofunction for use with something expecting a generator-based coroutine, e.g. codef mytaskfunc(arg): ... mytask = Task(costart(mytaskfunc, arg)) If you're willing to make changes, Task() et al could be made to recognise cofunctions and apply costart() where needed.
Hm, that feels backwards incompatible (since currently I can write Task(my_task_func(arg)) and also a step backwards in elegance (having to pass the args separately).
OTOH the benefit is that it's much harder to accidentally forget to wait for a coroutine. And maybe the backward compatibility issue is not really a problem because you have to opt in by using codef or async def.
So I'm still torn. :-)
Somebody would need to take a mature asyncio app and see how often this is used (i.e. how many place would require adding costart() as in the above example).
-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20150422/250236ec/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] async/await in Python; v2
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] async/await in Python; v2
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]