Yury Selivanov added the comment:
Thanks for the review Nick. I committed the patch with some additional minor
fixes, including your suggestion.
> Asynchronous iterator question: should the typical pattern for those be:
def __aiter__(self):
return self
def __await__(self):
return self
Well, adding __await__ to asynchronous iterators is the same as adding __call__
to regular iterators. It would be like:
i = iter(iterable) # __iter__
i = iterable() # __call__
ai = await iterable.__aiter__() # __aiter__
# or "ai = await aiter(iterable)", but we don't have it yet
ai = await iterable # __await__
> "Did we put the ABC's in the right place?" question: reviewing the draft docs
> meant I just noticed that collections.abc is quite an odd home for some of
> these. Probably not worth worrying about, given that AsyncIterator and
> AsyncIterable do belong, and the others are building blocks for those.
I had this question too. My impression is that Guido doesn't want to fix this
in 3.5. FWIW, my initial suggestion was to have "Coroutine", "Awaitable" and
"Hashable" in the top-level "abc" module (not ideal by any means).
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <[email protected]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24180>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
