On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> So we are keeping asynchronous generator expressions as long as they are >> defined in an 'async def' coroutine? > > > I would be happy to declare that `await` is out of scope for this thread. It > seems that it is always well-defined and sensible what it does in > comprehensions and in genexprs. (Although I can't help noticing that PEP 530 > does not appear to propose `await` in generator expressions -- it proposes > `async for` in comprehensions and in genexprs, and `await` in comprehensions > only -- but they appear to be accepted nevertheless.)
Great! As for PEP 530, after reading this discussion I realized how many things in it are underspecified. I'll be working on PEP 550 successor next week and will also try to update PEP 530 to make it clearer. > So we're back to the original issue, which is that `yield` inside a > comprehension accidentally makes it become a generator rather than a list, > set or dict. I believe that this can be fixed. But I don't believe we should > fix it. I believe we should ban `yield` from comprehensions and from > genexprs. +1 from me. Yury _______________________________________________ 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
