[Python-Dev] Fwd: Re: aiter/anext review request

2021年3月22日 08:39:01 -0700

On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 8:03 PM Guido van Rossum <[email protected]> wrote:
> The operator module is also C.
>
(In my 2018 PR, I was able to add the Python implementations of `aiter` and
`anext` to Lib/operator.py, right above where it does "from _operator
import *" toward the bottom of the file. I interpreted this pattern there
to mean "shadow Python implementations with C implementations where
available, but otherwise it's okay to use the Python implementations
above". Is that right?)
Dan also suggested freezing the Python implementations into the binary as a
way of keeping their implementations in Python, but in builtins rather than
operator.
> I am pleading to remove the 2nd arg to aiter, which should simplify the
> code.
>
Done in the latest revision of https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/23847.
That does indeed simplify the patch significantly, nice.[1]
All checks are passing. Yury or any other core developers, would you like
to merge this now?
Thanks again, everyone.
--Josh, Dan, and Justin
[1] The latest revision adds the following to the `aiter` docs:
Unlike the :func:`iter` builtin, :func:`aiter` has no 2-argument variant.
Often, this variant can be replaced with assignment expressions::
 while chunk := await sock.read(CHUNK_SIZE):
 ...
I think when I originally worked on this in 2018, PEP 572 had only just
been approved. :-)
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/JN3QVRDD3GZILCL7HTC6PPQL5N7J2NSA/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to