On Friday, July 29, 2016, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 at 10:46 Yury Selivanov > wrote:
>
>> Thanks a lot for the feedback, Brett! Comments inlined below:
>>
>> > On Jul 29, 2016, at 1:25 PM, Brett Cannon > > wrote:
>> >
>> [..]
>> >
>> > Performance is an additional point for
On Friday, July 29, 2016, Yury Selivanov wrote:
> Comments inlined:
>
>
> > On Jul 29, 2016, at 2:20 PM, Yarko Tymciurak > wrote:
> >
> > Hmm... I think we need to think about a future where, programmatically,
> there's little-to no distinction b
On Tuesday, August 2, 2016, Yury Selivanov wrote:
>
> > To keep it simple, try thinking like this (and yes, Yury, apologies -
> this is now a side discussion, and not about this pep): everything in
> CPython is async, and if you don't want async, you don't need to know
> about, you run a single
o
>
> I don't know yet if the benefit to share more code between implementations
> will be more important than the potential complexity code increase.
>
> The only point I'm sure for now: I'm preparing the pop-corn to watch the
> next episodes: curious to see what are th
On Monday, August 8, 2016, Yarko Tymciurak wrote:
> I still have to wonder, though, how an async repl, from the
> inside-out,which handles a single task by default (synchronous equivalent)
> would be anything less than explicit, or would complicate much (if anything
> - I suspect a
Thanks Cory -
I wasn't so much saying "Isn't Cory doing kinda what Brandon said" as I was
saying "Isn't this kinda the more general stuff that Bob Martin talks
(tries to talk about?) with Clean Architechture / Clean Coding (which
Brandon - first I saw explicitly - shows a bit of examples of in th
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Thomas Nyberg wrote:
> This is in reply to this message in the archives:
>
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/async-sig/2016-October/000141.html
>
> Nathaniel Smith:
> > I've found that when talking about async/await stuff recently, I've
> > mostly dropped t
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:48 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 3:32 PM, manuel miranda
> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > After using asyncio for a while, I'm struggling to find information about
> > how to support both synchronous and asynchronous use cases for the same
> > l
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 3:05 AM Alex Grönholm
wrote:
> Yarko Tymciurak kirjoitti 09.06.2017 klo 09:19:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:48 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 3:32 PM, manuel miranda
>> wrote:
>> > Hello everyone,
>> &
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 3:57 AM Alex Grönholm
wrote:
> Yarko Tymciurak kirjoitti 09.06.2017 klo 11:49:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 3:05 AM Alex Grönholm
> wrote:
>
>> Yarko Tymciurak kirjoitti 09.06.2017 klo 09:19:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:4
...so I really am enjoying the conversation.
Guido - re: "vision too far out": yes, for people trying to struggle w/
async support in their libraries, now... but that is also part of my
motivation. Python 5? Sure... (I may have to watch it come to use from
the grave, but hopefully not... ;-)
On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:54 PM Chris Jerdonek
wrote:
> The read-write operations I'm protecting will have coroutines inside
> that need to be awaited on, so I don't think I'll be able to take
> advantage to that extreme.
>
> But I think I might be able to use your point to simplify the logic a
>
On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Yarko Tymciurak wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Guido van Rossum
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Yarko Tymciurak
>> wrote:
>>
>>> To be a well-behaved (capable of effective cooperation) t
On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Guido van Rossum
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Yarko Tymciurak
> wrote:
>
>> To be a well-behaved (capable of effective cooperation) task in such a
>> system, you should guard against getting embroiled in potentially blocki
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 8:52 PM, Dima Tisnek wrote:
> My 2c: don't use py3.4; in fact don't use 3.5 either :)
> If you decide to support older Python versions, it's only fair that
> separate implementation may be needed.
>
I'd agree - focus Python 3.6+
>
> Re: overall problem, why not try the fo
15 matches
Mail list logo
