Author yselivanov
Recipients Jeremy Bustamante, berker.peksag, docs@python, gvanrossum, yselivanov
Date 2017-02-01.21:46:57
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
> Maybe we should switch all these to "awaitable"?

I like this!  Would it be OK to add a new sphinx declaration?  So that:

   .. coroutinemethod:: AbstractEventLoop.shutdown_asyncgens()

would become:

   .. awaitable:: AbstractEventLoop.shutdown_asyncgens()

> Also note that in, sock_connect() is *not* a coroutine. 

Yeah, those small incompatibilities are inevitable for asyncio programs/frameworks -- something that returns a Future may occasionally become a coroutine.  Your idea to document API methods as "awaitables" seems to be the right way to go.

> In fact I'm not sure what it is -- it calls self._proactor.connect() which appears to return None from the code in That's presumably a separate bug.

It looks like it returns the result of "IocpProactor.connect()" call, which returns an _OverlappedFuture instance (I don't really know Windows part of asyncio code, so I might be missing something).
Date User Action Args
2017-02-01 21:46:57yselivanovsetrecipients: + yselivanov, gvanrossum, docs@python, berker.peksag, Jeremy Bustamante
2017-02-01 21:46:57yselivanovsetmessageid: <>
2017-02-01 21:46:57yselivanovlinkissue29344 messages
2017-02-01 21:46:57yselivanovcreate