This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author yselivanov
Recipients Ben.Darnell, Yury.Selivanov, asvetlov, gvanrossum, martin.panter, ncoghlan, scoder, vstinner, yselivanov
Date 2015-06-19.22:04:05
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
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 22:04:06yselivanovsetrecipients: + yselivanov, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, scoder, vstinner, asvetlov, Yury.Selivanov, Ben.Darnell, martin.panter
2015-06-19 22:04:06yselivanovsetmessageid: <>
2015-06-19 22:04:06yselivanovlinkissue24400 messages
2015-06-19 22:04:05yselivanovcreate