On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
[Hopefully this is the last spin-off thread from "asyncore: included
batteries don't fit"]

So it's totally unfinished?

At the time, the people I talked to placed significantly more weight in "explain why this is necessary" than "get me something I can play with".
> Do you feel that there should be less talk about rationale?

No, but I feel that there should be some actual specification. I am
also looking forward to an actual meaty bit of example code -- ISTR
you mentioned you had something, but that it was incomplete, and I
can't find the link.

Just examples of how it would work, nothing hooked up to real code. My memory of it is more of a drowning-in-politics-and-bikeshedding kind of thing, unfortunately :) Either way, I'm okay with letting bygones be bygones and focus on how we can get this show on the road.

> It's not that there's *no* reference to IO: it's just that that reference is
> abstracted away in data_received and the protocol's transport object, just
> like Twisted's IProtocol.

The words "data_received" don't even occur in the PEP.

See above.

What thread should I reply in about the pull APIs?
I just want to make sure that we don't *completely* paint ourselves into the wrong corner when it comes to that.

I don't think we have to worry about it too much. Any reasonable API I can think of makes this completely doable.

But I'm really hoping you'll make good on your promise of redoing
async-pep, giving some actual specifications and example code, so I
can play with it.


- The async API of the future is very important, and too important to be left to chance.
- It requires a lot of very experienced manpower.
- It requires a lot of effort to handle the hashing out of it (as we're doing here) as well as it deserves to be.

I'll take as proactive a role as I can afford to take in this process, but I don't think I can do it by myself. Furthermore, it's a risk nobody wants to take: a repeat performance wouldn't be good for anyone, in particular not for Python nor myself.

I've asked JP Calderone and Itamar Turner-Trauring if they would be interested in carrying this forward professionally, and they have tentatively said yes. JP's already familiar with a large part of the problem space with the implementation of the ssl module. JP and Itamar have worked together for years and have recently set up a consulting firm.

Given that this is emphatically important to Python, I intend to apply for a PSF grant on their behalf to further this goal. Given their experience in the field, I expect this to be a fairly low risk endeavor.
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)