Message246141
| Author | yselivanov |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Ben.Darnell, Yury.Selivanov, asvetlov, gvanrossum, martin.panter, ncoghlan, python-dev, r.david.murray, scoder, vstinner, yselivanov |
| Date | 2015-07-03.06:46:55 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1435906015.21.0.22602945491.issue24400@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> If you want to cover the "iterable coroutine" case, why not add an inspect > helper function for that? That's clearly a concrete type (even more > concrete than a concrete type) that can be inspected. Because I view "iterable coroutines" as a temporary, transitional thing. 'inspect.isawaitable()' might be useful in the future even when we remove CO_ITERABLE_COROUTINE. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2015-07-03 06:46:55 | yselivanov | set | recipients: + yselivanov, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, scoder, vstinner, r.david.murray, asvetlov, Yury.Selivanov, python-dev, Ben.Darnell, martin.panter |
| 2015-07-03 06:46:55 | yselivanov | set | messageid: <1435906015.21.0.22602945491.issue24400@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2015-07-03 06:46:55 | yselivanov | link | issue24400 messages |
| 2015-07-03 06:46:55 | yselivanov | create | |