Sorry, when I wrote "future" (lower-case 'f') I really meant what Yury calls *awaitable*. That's either a coroutine or something with an __await__ emthod.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Łukasz Langa <luk...@langa.pl> wrote: > > On Apr 24, 2015, at 10:03 AM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > > *6. StopAsyncException* > > What if we required `ait.__anext__()` to return a future? > > > On top of my previous response, one more thing to consider is that this > idea brings a builtin Future back to the proposal, which has already been > rejected in the "No implicit wrapping in Futures” section of the PEP. > > PEP 492 manages to solve all issues without introducing a built-in Future. > > -- > Best regards, > Łukasz Langa > > WWW: http://lukasz.langa.pl/ > Twitter: @llanga > IRC: ambv on #python-dev > > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
