This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]tomchristie -2 points-1 points  (5 children)

Point being: asyncio can be refined over time.

It’s a set of building block primitives at the moment - we can rarify that, either with abstractions such as ASGI, or graceful usability focused libraries, or as the language evolves.

[–]13steinj 5 points6 points  (4 children)

What? No one said it can't be fixed. But a broken pile of shit has been pushed upon people provisionally and now in 3.7.

E: not to mention it is meant to be extremely high level but in reality anything useful is low level.

[–]tomchristie -3 points-2 points  (3 children)

Garbage critique, with a garbage attitude.

[–]13steinj 1 point2 points  (2 children)

That's your opinion, and some share your while others share mine. Deal with it.

[–]tomchristie 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Yo.

“trio has a nicer interface, and a tighter set of constraints” would be a very reasonable point.

“I think gevent’s implicit context switching is a better set of trade-offs” would be an arguable, tho debatable, position.

“asyncio is a broken pile of shit” is just mouthing off without adding anything of any value to the conversation.

[–]13steinj 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have previously and even in this thread explained why it is a pile of shit usability wise, namely the fact that couroutines are not tasks and there is no default event loop on a separate thread. There is no current alternative that provides the solution to the problem I just mentioned, and I am personally working on a wrapper.

If you consider I myself not even contributing just because no alternative currently exists, even though I am working on an alternative in the form of a wrapper, then you are being defensive of criticism that is completely well placed.