[Python-Dev] [Python-ideas] PEP 3156 - Asynchronous IO Support Rebooted
Laurens Van Houtven
_ at lvh.cc
Fri Dec 21 22:04:04 CET 2012
Looks reasonable to me :) Comments:
create_transport "combines" a transport and a protocol. Is that process
reversible? that might seem like an exotic thing (and I guess it kind of
is), but I've wanted this e.g for websockets, and I guess there's a few
other cases where it could be useful :)
eof_received on protocols seems unusual. What's the rationale?
I know we disagree that callbacks (of the line_received variety) are a good
idea for blocking IO (I think we should have universal protocol
implementations), but can we agree that they're what we want for tulip? If
so, I can try to figure out a way to get them to fit together :) I'm
assuming that this means you'd like protocols and transports in this PEP?
A generic comment on yield from APIs that I'm sure has been discussed in
some e-mail I missed: is there an obvious way to know up front whether
something needs to be yielded or yield frommed? In twisted, which is what
I'm used to it's all deferreds; but here a future's yield from but sleep's
Will comment more as I keep reading I'm sure :)
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Jesse Noller <jnoller at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I really do like tulip as the name. It's quite pretty.
> I chose it because Twisted and Tornado both start with T. But those
> have kind of dark associations; I wanted to offset that with something
> lighter. (OTOH we could use a black tulip as a logo. :-)
> Regardless, it's not the kind of name we tend to use for the stdlib.
> It'll probably end up being asynclib or something...
> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-Dev