Christian Heimes wrote:
Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
I'm worried whether it's stable, what user base it has, whether users
(other than the authors) are lobbying for inclusion. Statistically,
it seems to be not ready yet: it is not even a year old, and has not
reached version 1.0 yet.
I'm on Martin's side here. Although I like to see some sort of multi
processing mechanism in Python 'cause I need it for lots of projects I'm
against the inclusion of pyprocessing in 2.6 and 3.0. The project isn't
old and mature enough and it has some competitors like pp (parallel
processing).
On the one hand the inclusion of a package gives it an unfair advantage
over similar packages. On the other hand it slows down future
development because a new feature release must be synced with Python
releases about every 1.5 years.
-0.5 from me
It also isn't something which needs to be done *right now*. Leaving this
for 3.x/2.7 seems like a much better idea to me. With the continuing
rise of multi-processor desktop machines, the parallel processing
approaches that are out there should see a fair amount of use and active
development over the next 18 months.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
