On 5 May 2015 at 23:25, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Note that I don't have a problem with there being no existing >> implementation other than asyncio. I'd just like it if we could be >> clear over exactly what we mean when we say "the PEP is not tied to >> asyncio". > > Well, "the PEP is not tied to asyncio" -- this is correct. > *The new syntax and new protocols know nothing about asyncio*. > > asyncio will know about the PEP by implementing new protocols > where required etc (but supporting these new features isn't > in the scope of the PEP).
Thanks. That's something that may be worth explicitly noting in the PEP (I don't recall it from when I last looked but that was a while ago). Paul _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
