How do you implement "async for"?
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 11:21 PM, Mark Shannon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was looking at PEP 492 and it seems to me that no new syntax is required.
>
> Looking at the code, it does four things; all of which, or a functional
> equivalent, could be done with no new syntax
On Aug 13, 2014 7:04 PM, "Akira Li" <4kir4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Nick Coghlan writes:
>
> > On 12 August 2014 22:15, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> Compare the natural way of writing this:
> >>
> >> with open("spam") as spam, open("eggs", "w") as eggs,
frobulate("cheese") as cheese:
> >> # do
On Feb 14, 2014 1:13 PM, "Oleg Broytman" wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 09:54:35PM +1100, Chris Angelico
wrote:
> > So definitely SQL's handling of NULL should not be any sort of guide
> > as regards Python's treatment of None.
>
>Why not? Just make the order different for CPython and PyP
I'm not sure Droping imports is the best way to go, since every python
script/app will import common modules right on the start and it will still
seem like the interpeter boot is slow.
making modules load faster seems like a better approch
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:18 AM, Eric Snow wrote:
> O
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
> > Le Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:03:35 +1000,
> > Nick Coghlan a écrit :
> >> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:55 AM, Brian Curtin
> >> wrote:
> >> > Now that we have concurrent.futures, is ther
