On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 5:50 AM, Stefan Behnel firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Yury Selivanov schrieb am 30.04.2015 um 03:30:
- *native coroutine* term is used for "async def" functions.
When I read "native", I think of native (binary) code. So "native coroutine" sounds like it's implemented in some compiled low-level language. That might be the case (certainly in the CPython world), but it's not related to this PEP nor its set of examples.
We should discuss how we will name new 'async def' coroutines in Python Documentation if the PEP is accepted.
Well, it doesn't hurt to avoid obvious misleading terminology upfront.
I think "obvious[ly] misleading" is too strong, nobody is trying to mislead anybody, we just have different associations with the same word. Given the feedback I'd call "native coroutine" suboptimal (even though I proposed it myself) and I am now in favor of using "async function".