On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Sven R. Kunze <srkunze@mail.de> wrote: [...]
No really, I have absolutely no idea why you need to put that "async" in all places where Python can detect automatically if it needs to perform an async iteration or not. Maybe, Yury can explain.
I'm sure he would explain, but it seems I was first ;) [last-minute edit: no, Nick was first, but this is a slightly different angle]. First, the "async" gets inherited from PEP 492, so this has actually already been decided on. While not strictly necessary for a syntax for "async for", it makes it more explicit what happens under the hood -- that __a*__ methods are called and awaited, instead of simply calling __iter__/__next__ etc. as in regular loops/comprehensions. Not a lot to debate, I guess. No surprises here, just implementation work. -- Koos
Cheers, Sven
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- + Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +