David Lukeš <dafydd.lu...@gmail.com> added the comment:

Any updates on this? Making Executor.map lazier would indeed be more consistent 
and very useful, it would be a shame if the PR went to waste :) It's a feature 
I keep wishing for in comparison with the older and process-only 
multiprocessing API. And eventually, yielding results in the order that tasks 
complete, like multiprocessing.Pool.imap_unordered, could be added on top of 
this, which would be really neat. (I know there's 
concurrent.futures.as_completed, but again, that one doesn't handle infinite 
iterables.)

----------
nosy: +David Lukeš

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue29842>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to