Hello everybody, I thought I had sent this mail to everybody, so here was my answer to Nathaniel, Regards, Chris ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Christophe Bailly <chbailly@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2018 at 13:56 Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] [asyncio] Suggestion for a major PEP To: Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> Hello Nathaniel, After reading many papers, I understand that it is not as simple as I could imagine in my first thought. Sorry about that, I have learned something. Explicit vs implicit asynchronism is a complex topic. Regards, Chris On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 at 10:16, Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
If you want this style of concurrency, you don't need to write a PEP, just 'pip install gevent' :-)
But unfortunately you're years too late to argue for making asyncio work this way. This was discussed extensively at the time, and the decision to use special syntax was made intentionally, and after studying existing systems like gevent that made the other choice.
This section of the trio docs explain why explicit async/await syntax makes life easier for developers: https://trio.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference-core.html#checkpoints
It's also awkward but very doable to support both sync and async mode with a single code base: https://github.com/python-trio/unasync/
In fact, when doing this, the async/await syntax isn't really the hard part – the hard part is that different libraries have very different networking APIs. E.g., the stdlib socket API and the stdlib asyncio API are totally different.
-n On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 12:21 AM Christophe Bailly <chbailly@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
I copy paste the main idea from an article I have written: contextual async
"
Imagine you have some code written for monothread. And you want to
include your code in a multithread environment. Do you need to adapt all your code which is what you do when you want to migrate to async code ? The answer is no.
Functionnally these constraints are not justified neither technically
Do we have the tools to do this ? Yes because thanks to boost::context
we can switch context between tasks. When a task suspends, it just calls a function (the event loop or reactor) to potentially switch to another task. Just like threads switch contexts…
Async/Await logic has introduced a symetric relation wich introduces
unnecessary contraints. We should just the same logic as thread logic.
"
Read the examples in the article I have developped a prototype in C++
and everything works perfectly.
My opinion is that sooner or later, it will have to switch to this logic
because chaining async/aswait is a huge contraints and does not make sense in my opinion.
Maybe I am missing something,
Feel free to give me your feedback.
Regards,
Chris
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org