dangistan202611

> having to deal with their synchronization

No such thing has to be necessary. Tasks run fine on different threads/interpreters/processes. Message passing via queues is used to communicate which tasks need to run. Many asyncio users seem to wholly unaware of how well it works. Go-lang doesn't even have async.

Huh. There is nothing wrong with async, but if my code is sync, what am I to do?

Also, the claim made that something is better modeled as async is wholly unqualified.

Before you know it, you will be needing a workaround for every replacement tool you use in Ubuntu. This is what makes it unacceptable.

This looks like something that will break easily with a newer version of Python or even with the use of third-party packages. It seems to couple too tightly with the user's application code.

I dispute the "better" assertion. Anyhow, I don't know how familiar or not you are with sync code, but it fully supports background jobs using queues with threads/interpreters/processes. It has been around for decades. If you can willingly disregard support for it, I can willingly disregard your repo.

It is too async heavy as per its readme -- this is very off-putting. Not everyone cares for async. There is no usage shown with sync code.

Also, there is no license, which makes it dead on arrival.