On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:05 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> > wrote: > > 2012/12/20 Jonathan Slenders <jonat...@slenders.be>: > >> Personally, I think this is a very clean solution for Twisted's > >> @defer.inlineCalbacks, Tornado's @gen.engine, and similar functions in > >> other > >> async frameworks. > >> > >> Just sharing this information, but I'd also like to know whether Python > >> code > >> developers would consider to implement this in the Python standard > >> language. > >> (maybe Python 3000.) I really have no idea what steps are taken before > >> accepting new grammar, but I'm willing to defend this syntax or to write > >> some articles about it. > > > > That would be an issue for the python-ideas mailing list. > > To expand on Benjamin's answer: we do welcome people that use PyPy to > play with syntax extensions. However we're not going to do small > language extensions in ways incompatible with Python as implemented by > CPython. That's why you should discuss your idea starting from the > python-ideas mailing list. It is a plus if you have a working > prototype already, discuss it on your own blog, even use it already in > medium-scale projects. But I warn you, adding new keywords is tough. > :-)
adding to that, there is a recent maybe related PEP draft from Guido about async IO, see here: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3156/ holger _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
