[Python-Dev] PEP 492: What is the real goal? (original) (raw)

Oscar Benjamin oscar.j.benjamin at gmail.com
Tue May 5 18:01:28 CEST 2015

On 30 April 2015 at 09:50, Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel at gmail.com> wrote:

I'm flexible about how we name 'async def' functions. I like to call them "coroutines", because that's what they are, and that's how asyncio calls them. It's also convenient to use 'coroutine-object' to explain what is the result of calling a coroutine. I'd like the object created by an 'async def' statement to be called a 'coroutine function' and the result of calling it to be called a 'coroutine'.

That would be an improvement over the confusing terminology in the PEP atm. The PEP proposes to name the inspect functions inspect.iscoroutine() and inspect.iscoroutinefunction(). According to the PEP iscoroutine() identifies "coroutine objects" and iscoroutinefunction() identifies "coroutine functions" -- a term which is not defined in the PEP but presumably means what the PEP calls a "coroutine" in the glossary.

Calling the async def function an "async function" and the object it returns a "coroutine" makes for the clearest terminology IMO (provided the word coroutine is not also used for anything else). It would help to prevent both experienced and new users from confusing the two related but necessarily distinct concepts. Clearly distinct terminology makes it easier to explain/discuss something if nothing else because it saves repeating definitions all the time.

-- Oscar

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list