René's URL Explorer Experiment

{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"DiscussionForumPosting","headline":"[Bug] Using \u003c 3.10 on samples using global asyncio.Event fails","articleBody":"### Describe the bug\n`asyncio.Event` didn't get rid of its loop parameter (and defer loop lookup until use) until \u003e= 3.10. So samples that instantiate an `asyncio.Event()` globally will get this when running in \u003c 3.10:\n\n```\nTraceback (most recent call last):\n  File \"scratch\\scratch.py\", line 106, in \u003cmodule\u003e\n    loop.run_until_complete(main())\n  File \"asyncio\\base_events.py\", line 616, in run_until_complete\n  File \"scratch\\scratch.py\", line 99, in main\n    await interrupt_event.wait()\n  File \"asyncio\\locks.py\", line 309, in wait\nRuntimeError: Task \u003cTask pending name='Task-1' coro=\u003cmain() running at scratch\\scratch.py:99\u003e cb=[_run_until_complete_cb() at asyncio\\base_events.py:184]\u003e got Future \u003cFuture pending\u003e attached to a different loop\n```\n\nOf course delaying creation of the event until after loop creation and passing in the now-removed `loop` kwarg in the event constructor fixes it.\n\nWe just need to find a better way to marry asyncio and signals across our samples.\n\n","author":{"url":"https://github.com/cretz","@type":"Person","name":"cretz"},"datePublished":"2022-12-14T17:40:27.000Z","interactionStatistic":{"@type":"InteractionCounter","interactionType":"https://schema.org/CommentAction","userInteractionCount":0},"url":"https://github.com/37/samples-python/issues/37"}