Message247270
| Author | alex.gronholm |
|---|---|
| Recipients | alex.gronholm, gvanrossum, scoder, vstinner, yselivanov |
| Date | 2015-07-24.11:45:06 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1437738307.26.0.0197959915604.issue24383@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Yes, Yury's approach is wrong here -- Futures should not know about asyncio, but asyncio should be able to handle Futures natively. This seems like the obvious solution to me. Any counterarguments? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2015-07-24 11:45:07 | alex.gronholm | set | recipients: + alex.gronholm, gvanrossum, scoder, vstinner, yselivanov |
| 2015-07-24 11:45:07 | alex.gronholm | set | messageid: <1437738307.26.0.0197959915604.issue24383@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2015-07-24 11:45:07 | alex.gronholm | link | issue24383 messages |
| 2015-07-24 11:45:06 | alex.gronholm | create | |