Author gvanrossum
Recipients NeilGirdhar, Rosuav, belopolsky, ethan.furman, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, python-dev, r.david.murray, rhettinger, schlamar, scoder, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner
Date 2015-05-06.00:27:42
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <CAP7+vJJpxa=NH07TmDNA4j7aS4z__-zggcoMonhEoCcPTrMpwA@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1430871519.82.0.866015043761.issue22906@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
Well that would break a lot of code...
On May 5, 2015 5:18 PM, "STINNER Victor" <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:

>
> STINNER Victor added the comment:
>
> Would it be possible to push the first part of the implementation (without
> __future__) just to unblock the implementation of the PEP 492 (issue
> #24017: async/await)?
>
> Later push the second part for __future__.
>
> ----------
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue22906>
> _______________________________________
>
History
Date User Action Args
2015-05-06 00:27:42gvanrossumsetrecipients: + gvanrossum, rhettinger, ncoghlan, belopolsky, scoder, vstinner, r.david.murray, ethan.furman, python-dev, schlamar, Rosuav, serhiy.storchaka, NeilGirdhar
2015-05-06 00:27:42gvanrossumlinkissue22906 messages
2015-05-06 00:27:42gvanrossumcreate