Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> Given the proximity of RC1, Antoine's option 3 (leaving the capitalised
>> factory functions in both multiprocessing and threading APIs) is
>> actually sounding pretty appealing to me at the moment.
>
> I was actually suggesting this course for the threading module, whose API has
> existed for a lot of time now, but I think it would be better to clean up
> multiprocessing before its first stable relase. But the issue of time and
> manpower starts being a bit critical :)
Unfortunately, that's where the whole "close to a drop-in replacement
for threading" concept brings additions to the threading module API back
into play.
If I'd realised this a bit sooner I probably would have been pushing for
it to be dealt with for 2.6/3.0, but given that it's the kind of change
that we can easily do through the normal API deprecation process, I'm
really not comfortable messing with it this close to the release
(particularly after Jesse found a problem with the seemingly innocent
change to the multiprocessing implementation in issue 3589).
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
