-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use async/await through asyncio docs #69687
Comments
The asyncio docs still use |
It makes it more awkward to keep the asyncio docs in sync between 3.4 and 3.5. Also it makes copying examples harder for users who need compatibility with 3.4 or 3.3. |
Also sphinx (pygments actually) still do not support async/await syntax highlighting yet. |
We have dropped 3.3 in aiohttp BTW. |
Once 3.4.4 launches the need to keep the docs synced with a version that doesn't support async/await goes away. And worrying about 3.3 isn't necessary since asyncio was added in 3.4. So once 3.4.4 is released and we close the 3.4 branch to bugfixes can we update the docs in asyncio and add a note at the top saying the examples all use async/await from 3.5 and if you need 3.4 compatibility to please look at the 3.4 docs? Otherwise how long do you want to wait until we can start using async/await in the documentation? My worry is that people are going to blindly copy the examples and tweak them for their needs since the asyncio docs are a bit dense and thus just simply overlook the fact that async/await exists. |
Honestly I think it's better if most people keep using coroutine/yield-from instead of async/await for a few more releases; their code will be more portable, since it takes forever to update old datacenters. We put in async/await with an eye towards the future. But we're keeping yield-from around for a long time too. And that's also why we support asyncio for 3.3. |
Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.
Show more details
GitHub fields:
bugs.python.org fields:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: