Message245529
Actually, I'm not sure that we should use 'cr_*' prefix instead of 'gi_*' for coroutines.
Coroutines reusing generators machinery is a two-fold thing: on the one hand it makes the implementation simpler; on the other -- __await__ must return an *iterator*. If you want to push values into __await__, it must return a *generator*. Essentially, as Guido said in one of his emails, we should see PEP 492 as a refinement of 'yield from' and existing generator-based coroutines. I love the idea of separating types for coroutines and generators, but I'm not so sure about 'cr_*' prefix.
Nick, Guido, what do you think about this? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2015-06-19 22:04:06 | yselivanov | set | recipients:
+ yselivanov, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, scoder, vstinner, asvetlov, Yury.Selivanov, Ben.Darnell, martin.panter |
2015-06-19 22:04:06 | yselivanov | set | messageid: <1434751446.19.0.0401880166153.issue24400@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2015-06-19 22:04:06 | yselivanov | link | issue24400 messages |
2015-06-19 22:04:05 | yselivanov | create | |
|