shwouchk added the comment: I agree it might be less efficient, but sometimes it is the price to pay for greater generality/simplicity. After all, If I *really* wanted efficiency perhaps I would have written everything in C++.
Anyway, thanks! n.p. 1. "but should not cause any pratical difficulties" <-- you have a typo in 'pratical' there. 2. What exactly do you mean by "managed" queues in the new addition? Also, did part #2 of the note come up in other reports? It seemed somewhat trivial (can't hurt though)... Finally, I don't know whether I'm supposed to close the issue, but its a good solution as far as I'm concerned. Thanks again! ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue18277> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
