STINNER Victor added the comment:
> Probably this was the intended behavior as I see there's a test case for
> that. If such, then I would propose to document that behavior.
The code has an explicit check:
if not fs:
raise ValueError('Set of coroutines/Futures is empty.')
And yes, the behaviour is tested by test_asyncio.
Attached patch changes mention this behaviour in the documentation. Does it
look correct?
----------
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file35496/wait_doc.patch
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue21596>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
