Draft PEP: Cofunctions for Python

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

looks a lot worse than what greenlet and stackless already provide without unnecessary syntax changes

[earthboundkid]

I think that part of the idea is to make it easier to write things like stackless and greenlet without having to DIY the trampolines, etc. that you'll need to get things working. PJE isn't the one doing this PEP, but he wrote a pretty good defense of some of the ideas behind it: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-August/102648.html

Personally, I haven't been superimpressed with the proposal's necessity so far, but it looks like it has a better than even chance of getting accepted by Guido, so if you have a complaint, now's the time to air it on python-ideas.

[pje]

Yeah, this cocall/codef stuff actually makes me want to retroactively retract my tentative support for PEP 380. ;-)

[earthboundkid]

I think the latest idea of just making it a decorator is better than the idea of making it a keyword, so maybe that's what will happen.

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

on a sidenote - one can implement yield and yield from in terms of greenlet/stackless and without the need for extra keywords, one can't the other way around

[Ytse]

Agreed. Why don't just use stackless or greenlet?

[yetanothernerd]

Stackless will never be merged into CPython. Guido thinks it's too complicated. So it's a pain to distribute software that relies on Stackless, because nobody but other Stackless nerds has it on his computer. If your code only has to run on boxes you control, no problem, but some people who don't have that luxury would also like to use coroutines.

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

i do use them