[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:


New changeset de92769d473d1c0955d36da2fc71462621326f00 by jack1142 in branch 
'master':
bpo-34790: add version of removal of explicit passing of coros to 
`asyncio.wait`'s documentation (#20008)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/de92769d473d1c0955d36da2fc71462621326f00


--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[jack1142]

Change by jack1142 :


--
nosy: +jack1142
nosy_count: 7.0 -> 8.0
pull_requests: +19319
stage:  -> patch review
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/20008

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Andrew Svetlov]

Andrew Svetlov  added the comment:


New changeset 89aa7f0ede1a11c020e83f24394593c577a61509 by Andrew Svetlov (Kyle 
Stanley) in branch 'master':
bpo-34790: Implement deprecation of passing coroutines to asyncio.wait() 
(GH-16977)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/89aa7f0ede1a11c020e83f24394593c577a61509


--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Kyle Stanley  added the comment:

> Is this whatsnew/3.8.rst entry correct and complete?

> The :func:`asyncio.coroutine` :term:`decorator` is deprecated and will be 
> removed in version 3.10.  Instead of ``@asyncio.coroutine``, use 
> :keyword:`async def` instead. (Contributed by Andrew Svetlov in 
> :issue:`36921`.)

It looks to be fully consistent with the asyncio docs: 
https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio-task.html#generator-based-coroutines. 
From the blame of the documentation, it seems like Yury added the deprecation 
notice (GH-9314) to that section with the listed release for removal as 4.0, 
and then changed it to 3.10 (GH-9579). At a later date, Andrew implemented the 
actual deprecation (GH-13346).

So as far as I can tell, yes.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Raymond Hettinger]

Raymond Hettinger  added the comment:

Is this whatsnew/3.8.rst entry correct and complete?

'''
The :func:`asyncio.coroutine` :term:`decorator` is deprecated and will be 
removed in version 3.10.  Instead of ``@asyncio.coroutine``, use 
:keyword:`async def` instead. (Contributed by Andrew Svetlov in :issue:`36921`.)
'''

--
nosy: +rhettinger

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Kyle Stanley  added the comment:

GH-16977 Implements the deprecation warning, adds tests, and adds the 3.9 
whatsnew entry. Once this PR is finalized, I think this issue can be closed.

--
stage: patch review -> 

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Change by Kyle Stanley :


--
pull_requests: +16503
stage:  -> patch review
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/16977

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Kyle Stanley  added the comment:

GH-16975 Is a simple fix for the asyncio.wait() whatsnew entry for 3.8. I'll 
implement the deprecation warning and add a 3.9 whatsnew entry in a separate 
PR, since those changes won't be backported.

--
stage: patch review -> 

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Change by Kyle Stanley :


--
pull_requests: +16502
stage:  -> patch review
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/16975

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Andrew Svetlov]

Andrew Svetlov  added the comment:

lgtm

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Kyle Stanley  added the comment:

> Regarding 3.8 release notes update -- not sure if it is needed flr docs-only 
> change.

I'm not certain if the entry is necessary; my main concern is just that it's 
already present in the 3.8 release notes/whatsnew without anywhere to look for 
further information. 

> In the current situation, we have so-called *soft deprecation*: bare 
> coroutines are deprecated in docs without any code change. This is perfectly 
> fine, we give our users extra time to prepare for changes.

So is something considered to be a "soft deprecation" if there is no code 
change? If so, I may have made a mistake by specifying a release in the entry I 
recently added for it (https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.8.html#deprecated):

"The explicit passing of coroutine objects to asyncio.wait() has been 
deprecated and will be removed in version 3.10."

I would propose to adjust this to:

"The explicit passing of coroutine objects to asyncio.wait() has been 
deprecated. (Contributed by Yury Selivanov in :issue:`34790`.)"

Then for 3.9 whatsnew, we could specify the release:

"The explicit passing of coroutine objects to asyncio.wait() has been 
deprecated and will be removed in 3.11."

Thoughts?

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Kyle Stanley  added the comment:

Sounds good, I'll work on opening a PR.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:

I'd add `and will be removed in 3.11.` now.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Andrew Svetlov]

Andrew Svetlov  added the comment:

> If we add the deprecation warning just for 3.9, would the removal release 
> also be pushed forward? 

Yes, deprecating in 3.9 with removal in 3.11 is fine.

Regarding 3.8 release notes update -- not sure if it is needed flr docs-only 
change.

In the current situation, we have so-called *soft deprecation*: bare coroutines 
are deprecated in docs without any code change. This is perfectly fine, we give 
our users extra time to prepare for changes.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Kyle Stanley  added the comment:

> It was the first time I saw a deprecation clearly documented in a final 
> release that didn't have an associated deprecation warning. 

I want to clarify that this may be a more common occurrence than I'm realizing, 
I'm not entirely certain. Also it's not intended at all as a criticism, it just 
surprised me since it was the first time I saw it happen.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Kyle Stanley  added the comment:

> I think we can add `DeprecationWarning` for 3.9.

If we add the deprecation warning just for 3.9, would the removal release also 
be pushed forward? 

> Honestly, we just missed the issue when were prepared for 3.8

Yeah that's definitely understandable, there were quite a number of major 
changes made in 3.8. It was the first time I saw a deprecation clearly 
documented in a final release that didn't have an associated deprecation 
warning. 

As for 3.8, I would like to update the whatsnew entry to add a link to this bpo 
issue if that's okay, as it does not at the moment. I recently included the 
entry in a PR that added entries for multiple significant changes for asyncio 
in the 3.8, but I forgot to include the bpo link (mostly because I found it in 
the documentation, rather than from the bpo issue).

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Andrew Svetlov]

Andrew Svetlov  added the comment:

I think we can add `DeprecationWarning` for 3.9.

Since it is a) just a warning b) already marked as deprecated in docs -- the 
harm is minimal.

Honestly, we just missed the issue when were prepared for 3.8

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Kyle Stanley]

Kyle Stanley  added the comment:

> Actually, since Andrew also agrees that we need to deprecate passing 
> coroutines to wait(), I'll keep this issue open until we add an actual 
> DeprecationWarning in 3.8.

Since 3.8 has been released and the deprecation notice is in the 3.8 whatsnew 
document, should we implement the warning in Lib/asyncio/tasks.py? If so, I can 
open a PR. 

> PendingDeprecationWarning

Also, it's not clear to me if this should be a DeprecationWarning or 
PendingDeprecationWarning. The most recent message from Yury in the issue 
suggests a PendingDeprecationWarning, but the actual entry in the documentation 
(https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio-task.html?highlight=asyncio%20wait#asyncio.wait)
 seems like it might imply that it would be a DeprecationWarning:

> Deprecated since version 3.8: If any awaitable in aws is a coroutine, it is 
> automatically scheduled as a Task. Passing coroutines objects to wait() 
> directly is deprecated as it leads to confusing behavior.

--
nosy: +aeros
status: pending -> open

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Change by Serhiy Storchaka :


--
status: open -> pending

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka  added the comment:

AFAIK there is no a plan for 4.0. But seems many core developers (including me) 
think that changing the major number should reflect some major changes like 
removing GIL. And Guido preferred 3.10 after 3.9.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:

PendingDeprecationWarning

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[miss-islington]

miss-islington  added the comment:


New changeset 3cc9557d9f03086fa3b0ea166f8506087e6950e3 by Miss Islington (bot) 
in branch '3.7':
bpo-34790: [docs] Passing coroutines to asyncio.wait() can be confusing. 
(GH-9543)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/3cc9557d9f03086fa3b0ea166f8506087e6950e3


--
nosy: +miss-islington

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:

Actually, since Andrew also agrees that we need to deprecate passing coroutines 
to wait(), I'll keep this issue open until we add an actual DeprecationWarning 
in 3.8.

--
resolution: fixed -> 
stage: resolved -> 
status: closed -> open

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

Change by Yury Selivanov :


--
resolution:  -> fixed
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[miss-islington]

Change by miss-islington :


--
pull_requests: +8979

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:


New changeset 996859a90df51f84eab47351702cb59c6db4428a by Yury Selivanov in 
branch 'master':
bpo-34790: [docs] Passing coroutines to asyncio.wait() can be confusing. 
(GH-9543)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/996859a90df51f84eab47351702cb59c6db4428a


--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Karthikeyan Singaravelan]

Change by Karthikeyan Singaravelan :


--
nosy: +xtreak

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

Yury Selivanov  added the comment:

> 4.0 is too far. Why not disallow them in 3.10?

What's the current plan?  I thought it's going to be 3.8, 3.9, 4.0.  Is there a 
PEP detailing this?

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Serhiy Storchaka  added the comment:

4.0 is too far. Why not disallow them in 3.10?

--
nosy: +serhiy.storchaka

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

Change by Yury Selivanov :


--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +8945
stage:  -> patch review

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34790] Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()

[Yury Selivanov]

New submission from Yury Selivanov :

asyncio.wait() accepts coroutines, wraps them into Tasks, and later returns 
those implicitly created Tasks in (done, pending) sets.  This is very confusing 
to new asyncio users and it's almost impossible to figure out what is going on. 
 See the first PR to the docs for more info.

Andrew, I think we should deprecate passing coroutines to asyncio.wait() in 
3.8, and disallow that in 4.0.

--
components: asyncio
messages: 326265
nosy: asvetlov, yselivanov
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Deprecate passing coroutine objects to asyncio.wait()
type: behavior

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com