On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 20:46:35 +1000 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9 January 2018 at 20:07, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 21:22:56 -0800 > > Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> I'm surprised that multiprocessing.Connection isn't iterable -- it seems > >> like an obvious oversight. > > > > What is obvious about making a connection iterable? It's the first > > time I see someone requesting this. > > If you view them as comparable to subprocess pipes, then it can be > surprising that they're not iterable when using a line-oriented > protocol. > > If you instead view them as comparable to socket connections, then the > lack of iteration support seems equally reasonable.
multiprocessing connections are actually message-oriented. So perhaps it could make sense for them to be iterable. But they are also quite low-level (often you wouldn't use them directly, but instead rely on multiprocessing.Queue). > Hence my suggestion of providing a docs recipe showing an example of > wrapping a connection in a generator in order to define a suitable way > of getting from a raw bytestream to iterable chunks. Well... if someone needs a doc recipe for this, they shouldn't use the lower-level functionality and instead stick to multiprocessing.Queue. (this begs the question: should multiprocessing.Queue be iterable? well, it's modeled on queue.Queue which isn't iterable) Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/