Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.061 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.88; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:Python': 0.06; 'subject:PEP': 0.07; 'generators': 0.09; 'pep': 0.09; 'sure,': 0.09; 'yeah,': 0.09; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; 'python': 0.11; '(it': 0.16; 'cleaner': 0.16; 'coroutines': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'jumping': 0.16; 'relevant,': 0.16; 'uses,': 0.16; 'sat,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'discussion': 0.18; 'obviously': 0.18; "hasn't": 0.19; 'not,': 0.20; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'replace': 0.24; 'paul': 0.24; 'looks': 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; "i've": 0.25; 'performing': 0.26; 'post': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'idea': 0.28; 'chris': 0.29; 'raise': 0.29; 'wonder': 0.29; "doesn't": 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'posting': 0.31; 'about.': 0.31; 'dated': 0.31; 'though.': 0.31; 'writes:': 0.31; 'stuff': 0.32; 'weeks': 0.32; 'ago': 0.33; 'checking': 0.33; "i'd": 0.34; 'created': 0.35; 'something': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'being': 0.38; 'subject:new': 0.38; 'whatever': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'system.': 0.39; 'either': 0.39; 'mentioned': 0.61; 'new': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'first': 0.61; "you'll": 0.62; 'complete': 0.62; 'kind': 0.63; 'chance': 0.65; 'land': 0.65; 'spot': 0.65; 'between': 0.67; 'url:pdf': 0.68; 'subject': 0.69; "today's": 0.70; 'brand': 0.72; 'evaluate': 0.72; 'paper': 0.75; 'day': 0.76; 'truth': 0.81; '2015': 0.84; ':).': 0.84; 'duplication': 0.84; 'replica': 0.84; 'hate': 0.91; 'sorry.': 0.91; 'to:none': 0.92; 'yourself,': 0.95 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=LI3+00b0M0La1GbgZXNerJPgN+xqmdngB5qe/k5CkQQ=; b=APLTHXrMXv2in7lVBKk9TNpBymcQk9hXSL93/5hi6MLZda5N+CddlD7i1udXivGuUq elDIyLpZJeeboTU+ViYqMRnAy8EQZ/1XRKfEO1AMJJrFo5sXJgGLBx47NP52nl719V8Y avW3LcG+++DO+efogegaD1JjZr5FtERQ8wCbBxJlqw0Dw54+b8TObkn93J8vhJ+uxstT ANpn65AKL5DSMBVD1zvDSgen9OrVhxzVU5m/AdhcZI1oHgC0SEay/x0dX0IRi7nmf0gP EBds6ul88QZaIuVhjKf/Ca5dS+OG1OkpgJ9XtD8NsDJWvlFcXFfMJrNE6xqiIAn8KpWA pQ7A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.43.17.135 with SMTP id qc7mr7306450icb.59.1429338038527; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 23:20:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87k2xagfwr.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> References: <87fv7yjdw7.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> <87k2xagfwr.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 16:20:38 +1000 Subject: Re: PEP 492, new coroutine syntax for Python From: Chris Angelico Cc: "python-list@python.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 42 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1429338041 news.xs4all.nl 2946 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:50128 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:89111 On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > Chris Angelico writes: >> Hah. It only just hit python-ideas, so you're jumping in on something >> brand new - no wonder it hasn't been mentioned yet :) > > Interesting. It's dated a couple weeks ago and has obviously been in > the works for a while. There's a working implementation which I'd think > means it's outside the idea phase. I'm not sure, but I suspect it's been developed/discussed in a SIG. Today's the first day I've seen stuff about it. >> I think the current proposal has a lot of duplication (it looks like >> there's almost a complete replica of the generator protocol being >> created in parallel), but whatever happens, it's a good thing. > > But it's so much cleaner than the existing generator stuff and can > pretty much replace it. That is the kind of change that Python 3 really > should have been about. Generators have other uses, but I think the intention is to subsume all the generator-based coroutine system. You'd have to raise this on -ideas, though. >> There's a chance this will land in Python 3.5, but if not, I'd be very >> surprised if it doesn't hit 3.6. > > Neat :). This paper about Lua coroutines is good and if it hasn't been > part of the PEP discussion and looks relevant, you might want to post it > there: > > http://www.jucs.org/jucs_10_7/coroutines_in_lua/de_Moura_A_L.pdf I hate to say TLDR, but it's the truth here. I'm posting from theatre (we're performing The Merry Widow and I'm checking in between follow spot cues... yeah, I'm insane), and don't have time this week to evaluate a paper like that on a subject that I'm not an expert on. Either someone else who subscribes to both python-list and python-ideas will post it, or you'll have to join -ideas yourself, sorry. ChrisA