(Also, there might be some interaction with PEP 492 here, which also tweaks
the definition of generators.)
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> That's a good question. We *could* make it so that you can subclass
> Generator and instantiate the instances; or we could even ma
That's a good question. We *could* make it so that you can subclass
Generator and instantiate the instances; or we could even make it do some
structural type checking. (Please file a pull request or issue for this at
github.com/ambv/typehinting .) But perhaps we should also change asyncio?
What che
Guido van Rossum schrieb am 18.04.2015 um 18:38:
> That's a good question. We *could* make it so that you can subclass
> Generator and instantiate the instances; or we could even make it do some
> structural type checking. (Please file a pull request or issue for this at
> github.com/ambv/typehinti
Stefan Behnel schrieb am 18.04.2015 um 19:39:
> Guido van Rossum schrieb am 18.04.2015 um 18:38:
>> That's a good question. We *could* make it so that you can subclass
>> Generator and instantiate the instances; or we could even make it do some
>> structural type checking. (Please file a pull reque
Maybe the thing to fix then is the inspect module, not asyncio? Anyway, let
is know via tickets.
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Stefan Behnel schrieb am 18.04.2015 um 19:39:
> > Guido van Rossum schrieb am 18.04.2015 um 18:38:
> >> That's a good question. We *could* mak
