Author vstinner
Recipients YoSTEALTH, benjamin.peterson, giampaolo.rodola, martin.panter, njs, pitrou, stutzbach, vstinner, xgdomingo
Date 2019-10-11.12:47:25
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1570798045.41.0.313364157711.issue32561@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
I suggest to leave not attempt to put "async or "await" in the io module to keep it a "simple" as possible, but fix bpo-13322 (in io and _pyio modules).

Instead, I suggest to write a new module only providing asynchronous methods, maybe even for open() and close(). But the new module can reuse the existing io module to avoid having to write complex algorithm like read-ahead, buffering, etc.

Well, I'm not 100% sure that it's doable, since io is hiding many implementation details, there are complex issues like multithreading, locks, interlaced read and write operations, etc.

Note: The io module doesn't fully suppored interlaced read and write :-) See bpo-12215 for example.
History
Date User Action Args
2019-10-11 12:47:25vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, benjamin.peterson, stutzbach, njs, martin.panter, YoSTEALTH, xgdomingo
2019-10-11 12:47:25vstinnersetmessageid: <1570798045.41.0.313364157711.issue32561@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2019-10-11 12:47:25vstinnerlinkissue32561 messages
2019-10-11 12:47:25vstinnercreate