Dj Gilcrease wrote: > On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Jesse Noller <jnol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Making the tests and examples happy on windows is fine; but some >> explanation is needed for the API changes. >> > > My primary motivation behind the API change is so there is just a > single public Executor class that you tell what system to use instead > of two separate classes. The use case I was thinking about is when a > user is is unsure which system (threads or processes) they want to use > so they just build the system with the defaults (which is threads) > then it is a little easier to switch it to processes in the future > instead of having to change imports and all instances of the class you > just change the use keyword to switch between systems
Wouldn't a factory function serve that purpose just as well? Or even just "from concurrent.futures import ProcessPoolExecutor as TaskExecutor". That last form has the virtue that you can retrieve your executor from anywhere rather than being limited to the two provided by the concurrent.futures model. I think the string based approach actually unduly constrains the API despite superficially appearing to make it more flexible. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ 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
