Nick Coghlan wrote:
> You may want to consider providing global thread and process
executors
> in the futures module itself. Code which just wants to say "do this
in
> the background" without having to manage the lifecycle of its own
> executor instance is then free to do so. I've had a lot of experience
> with a framework that provides this and it is *very* convenient (it's
> also a good way to avoid deadlocks due to synchronous notification
APIs).
This seems like a reasonable idea to me.
I take it that the thread/process pool should be unlimited in size.
Should every thread/process exit when it finishes its job or should
there be a smarter collection strategy?
Cheers,
Brian
_______________________________________________
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
