I believe it is documentation issue, not internal implementation problem. On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 6:31 PM Xavier Combelle <xavier.combe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Dave has repeatedly stated that he's not interested in maintaining > > Curio long term or keeping the API stable. That means it's not going > > to happen. It might make more sense to propose carefully designed > > additions to asyncio that aim to fill in the gaps you've found by > > using curio. This should focus on API functionality; the performance > > is being worked on separately, and there's also uvloop. > > > I did not did really experienced asyncio by finding it too much complicated > (and that I did not had real use case). > But when I read curio documentation I found it wonderful to the point > I want to experiment with it > I would love to see something similar in python standard library as > (from my point of view) > it looks like more understandable than current asyncio. > > -- Thanks, Andrew Svetlov
