gentlegiantJGC

There may also be cases where we want to modify the return type in a way which is incompatible with with old API. I think in your case you would...

Also as another thought if we wanted to implement something like async syntax your way would be very incompatible. Not saying that we want to currently but I think a...

I haven't used asyncio much apart from in the bot. You define a function like normal but do `async def` instead of the normal `def` That function instead returns immediately...

`Backwards compatibility should be maintained while allowing reuse of existing function/method names.` Agreed `Calls to API functions/methods should always default to the new implementation with the deprecated functionality only available...

> After reviewing the Python docs on asyncio, I don't see anything that immediately indicates my proposal would be incompatible, so unless I'm missing something I believe that it passes...

You are right that does work but that is no longer async since I think `run` blocks until it is finished thus defeating the point of making it async

Yes that does work but I don't like how it relies on required keyword inputs to make it work. We should be able to design the API to be the...

The issue is that normally with libraries, the code that uses it can specify the API version that it wants to use. Eg if we want to use numpy we...

I think your suggestion is quite similar to what I proposed. I like your use of `__subclasses__` I had forgotten about that. My only issue is that the user needs...

I think you are also relying on the core classes being public to switch API versions. Lets say that we have switched to API version 2 and the editor is...