Skip to content

PEP 806: add Discuss link #4609

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
hauntsaninja merged 1 commit into from
Sep 26, 2025
Merged

PEP 806: add Discuss link #4609

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion peps/pep-0806.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ Created: 05-Sep-2025
Python-Version: 3.15
Post-History:
`22-May-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/92939/>`__,
`25-Sep-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/103971/>`__,
Copy link
Member

@hugovk hugovk Sep 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please also use this for Discussions-To.


Abstract
========
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -197,7 +198,8 @@ executing ``await sleep(0)``) to allow cancellation is undesirable. On the
other hand, *omitting* ``await sleep(0)`` would break the transitive property
that a syntactic ``await`` / ``async for`` / ``async with`` always calls back
into the async runtime (or raises an exception). While few codebases enforce
this property, we have found it indispensable in preventing deadlocks.
this property today, we have found it indispensable in preventing deadlocks,
and accordingly prefer a cleaner foundation for the ecosystem.


Workaround: using ``AsyncExitStack``
Expand Down