I really don't want to break all the uses of this idiom on a point release, but I agree it's hard to understand. Maybe we can compromise and add a warning when _stopping is True upon entering run_forever()?
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Yury Selivanov <yseliva...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Nov 19, 2015, at 1:01 PM, Aymeric Augustin >> <aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I understand the backwards-compatibility concerns. However I have to say that >> the pattern: >> >> loop.call_soon(loop.stop) >> loop.run_forever() >> >> seems much easier to understand and more logical than: >> >> loop.stop() >> loop.run_forever() > > > I agree. > > I think we’re trying too hard to save a broken behaviour. "loop.stop(); > loop.run_forever()” is completely non-obvious, it’s a bad practice to use > stop/run_forever like this. > > Yury -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
