Yury Selivanov <yseliva...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> It would be nice if asyncio.run() uses the default loop if it's available > (and not running), and that the default loop remains intact after the call > returns. Unfortunately it's not possible to implement that reliably and without a bunch of surprising behaviors. Also, if you want the loop to be intact after asyncio.run, it means that you would not want to close it;that would defeat the purpose of asyncio.run. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue38599> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
