From e93f1444b9f934e06032def258ed0022bff339f7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kumar Aditya <kumaraditya@python.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 11:00:32 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] fix outdated comments in asyncio

---
 Lib/asyncio/futures.py   | 3 +--
 Lib/asyncio/tasks.py     | 4 ++--
 Modules/_asynciomodule.c | 2 +-
 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Lib/asyncio/futures.py b/Lib/asyncio/futures.py
index 9c1b5e49e1a70b..5f6fa2348726cf 100644
--- a/Lib/asyncio/futures.py
+++ b/Lib/asyncio/futures.py
@@ -43,7 +43,6 @@ class Future:
     - This class is not compatible with the wait() and as_completed()
       methods in the concurrent.futures package.
 
-    (In Python 3.4 or later we may be able to unify the implementations.)
     """
 
     # Class variables serving as defaults for instance variables.
@@ -61,7 +60,7 @@ class Future:
     #   the Future protocol (i.e. is intended to be duck-type compatible).
     #   The value must also be not-None, to enable a subclass to declare
     #   that it is not compatible by setting this to None.
-    # - It is set by __iter__() below so that Task._step() can tell
+    # - It is set by __iter__() below so that Task.__step() can tell
     #   the difference between
     #   `await Future()` or`yield from Future()` (correct) vs.
     #   `yield Future()` (incorrect).
diff --git a/Lib/asyncio/tasks.py b/Lib/asyncio/tasks.py
index cd869931e01409..2f8f4f08a1e111 100644
--- a/Lib/asyncio/tasks.py
+++ b/Lib/asyncio/tasks.py
@@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ def __eager_start(self):
     def __step(self, exc=None):
         if self.done():
             raise exceptions.InvalidStateError(
-                f'_step(): already done: {self!r}, {exc!r}')
+                f'__step(): already done: {self!r}, {exc!r}')
         if self._must_cancel:
             if not isinstance(exc, exceptions.CancelledError):
                 exc = self._make_cancelled_error()
@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ def __wakeup(self, future):
         else:
             # Don't pass the value of `future.result()` explicitly,
             # as `Future.__iter__` and `Future.__await__` don't need it.
-            # If we call `_step(value, None)` instead of `_step()`,
+            # If we call `__step(value, None)` instead of `__step()`,
             # Python eval loop would use `.send(value)` method call,
             # instead of `__next__()`, which is slower for futures
             # that return non-generator iterators from their `__iter__`.
diff --git a/Modules/_asynciomodule.c b/Modules/_asynciomodule.c
index d5d28f8ab0c016..5824c470699d88 100644
--- a/Modules/_asynciomodule.c
+++ b/Modules/_asynciomodule.c
@@ -2892,7 +2892,7 @@ task_step_impl(asyncio_state *state, TaskObj *task, PyObject *exc)
 
     if (task->task_state != STATE_PENDING) {
         PyErr_Format(state->asyncio_InvalidStateError,
-                     "_step(): already done: %R %R",
+                     "__step(): already done: %R %R",
                      task,
                      exc ? exc : Py_None);
         goto fail;