Message316962
| Author | yselivanov |
|---|---|
| Recipients | asvetlov, fried, hniksic, lukasz.langa, yselivanov |
| Date | 2018-05-17.16:42:48 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1526575368.72.0.682650639539.issue33544@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> Deprecating Event.wait would be incorrect because Event was designed to mimic the threading.Event class which has a (blocking) wait() method[1]. This is rather important. I'd like to continue maintaining this similarity. Adding 'await event' would be similar (in a way) to making instances of threading.Event callable. So deprecation of '.wait()' isn't something we will do. Having *both* 'await event.wait()' and 'await event' worries me. IMO the slight readability improvement isn't worth the added complexity. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2018-05-17 16:42:48 | yselivanov | set | recipients: + yselivanov, hniksic, asvetlov, lukasz.langa, fried |
| 2018-05-17 16:42:48 | yselivanov | set | messageid: <1526575368.72.0.682650639539.issue33544@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2018-05-17 16:42:48 | yselivanov | link | issue33544 messages |
| 2018-05-17 16:42:48 | yselivanov | create | |