Yury Selivanov <yseliva...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> If you disagree with me, please say why, don't just merge the PR. Apologies, Mark. I didn't intend to merge something bypassing your opinion; just missed your comment between reviewing multiple PRs in a few unrelated repos. I'm sorry. On the actual naming subject, you proposed: > `PySendResult PyIter_Send(PyObject *obj, PyObject *arg, PyObject **result);` The problem with using this name is that ideally we should also support non-native coroutine and generator implementations (i.e. resolve the "send" attribute and call it using Python calling convention). Ideally we should have two C APIs: one low-level supporting only native objects and a high level one, supporting all kinds of them. Can we perhaps add both `PyGen_Send()` and `PyCoro_Send()` for now that would only accept generators and coroutines respectively? After that we can discuss adding a more generic `PyIter_Send`? > Would you revert the PR, please. Since this is in 3.10/master that nobody uses right now except us (Python core devs), can we just issue a follow up PR to fix whatever is there to fix? I'd like to avoid the churn of reverting, and again, I apologize for pushing this a bit hastily. Let me know if you actually want a revert and I'll do that. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue41756> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
