On 26/05/10 17:38, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 26 May 2010 09:54:13 +1000
Nick Coghlan<ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
What I would question here is what other things will be part
of the "concurrent" package, and who will implement them. Are there
plans for that? (or even tracker issues open?)
I'm not sure it is called out explicitly in the PEP, but the specific
example that came up in the previous discussions was something like
"concurrent.pool" to hold a thread vs process agnostic worker pool
interface based on the existing Pool interface in multiprocessing
(with concrete implementations for both threading and
multiprocessing).
Ha, I'm a bit surprised. Isn't it what "futures" already provides?
(except that for some reason it insists on the "SomeExecutor" naming
scheme)
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3148/#processpoolexecutor
Not really - a general purpose pool would be a lot more agnostic about
how you give the pooled threads/processes work to do and get the results
back.
Executors are the kind of thing you would build on top of one though. If
concurrent.pool was added, then the existing processing pools in
multiprocessing and the executors in concurrent.future would be the
first use cases for it.
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
