Roundup Robot devn...@psf.upfronthosting.co.za added the comment:
New changeset 3b127a415643 by Sandro Tosi in branch '2.7':
Issue #11836: document multiprocessing.queues.SimpleQueue
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3b127a415643
New changeset fe5eb6d35025 by Sandro Tosi in branch '3.2':
Issue
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
Thanks for all you inputs!
--
resolution: - fixed
stage: patch review - committed/rejected
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11836
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
Thanks Eli for the heads-up, I had missed Antoine's comment!
Antoine, I'm probably missing something, but SimpleQueue is present in 2.7 and
3.2 too, so why not mention it in the doc for those versions too?
--
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Antoine, I'm probably missing something, but SimpleQueue is present in
2.7 and 3.2 too, so why not mention it in the doc for those versions too?
What I mean is that multiprocessing.SimpleQueue is a new API, so should be
3.3-only (while
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
It's the way all the subclasses are imported into the main module that got me
in fault, I think. OK, so if I got it correctly, I should document
multiprocessing.queue.SimpleQueue in 2.7 and 3.1 and
multiprocessing.SimpleQueue in 3.3 also
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
It's the way all the subclasses are imported into the main module that
got me in fault, I think. OK, so if I got it correctly, I should
document multiprocessing.queue.SimpleQueue in 2.7 and 3.1 and
multiprocessing.SimpleQueue in 3.3 also
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com added the comment:
OK, so if I got it correctly, I should document
multiprocessing.queue.SimpleQueue in 2.7 and 3.1 [...]
and 3.2, we're no longer updating 3.1 with such changes
--
___
Python tracker
Changes by Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com:
--
Removed message: http://bugs.python.org/msg153224
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11836
___
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com added the comment:
OK, so if I got it correctly, I should document
multiprocessing.queue.SimpleQueue in 2.7 and 3.1 [...]
s/3.1/3.2/
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11836
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
OK, so if I got it correctly, I should document
multiprocessing.queue.SimpleQueue in 2.7 and 3.1 [...]
s/3.1/3.2/
yeah, just a typo :)
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com added the comment:
Sandro, can you commit, taking Antoine's note into account?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11836
___
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com added the comment:
Then it appears to me that Sandro's patch is good and can be committed.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11836
___
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Then it appears to me that Sandro's patch is good and can be committed.
The doc patch is good. However, if you start exposing SimpleQueue at the
top package level, you have to do it in 3.3 only (since that's a new
API), and also mention it
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Well, the sentinels argument, right now, is meant to be used internally. I
don't think it's a good thing to document it, since I don't think it's a very
clean API (I know, I introduced it :-)) - it's just so that concurrent.futures
can detect
sbt shibt...@gmail.com added the comment:
Well, the sentinels argument, right now, is meant to be used
internally. I don't think it's a good thing to document it,
since I don't think it's a very clean API (I know, I introduced
it :-))
Wouldn't a better alternative be to have a wait
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Wouldn't a better alternative be to have a wait function which can
deal with readable pipe connections and integer handles?
On Unix this would just delegate to select().
On Windows it could work as follows:
* initiate an overlapped read
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com added the comment:
Sandro - yep, the sentinels arg is also undocumented in
multiprocessing.PipeConnection.recv() and further down the road...
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com added the comment:
However, sentinels *are* mentioned in the multiprocessing doc, below
multiprocessing.Process:
sentinel
A numeric handle of a system object which will become “ready” when the
process ends.
On Windows, this is an OS handle usable with
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
Here's a patch to add SimpleQueue to doc and __all__ .
I didn't document the 'sentinels' argument of SimpleQueue.get() because I got
lost into Pipe _pool and can't understand how those sentinels are actually
used/useful. Any hint is
Changes by Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com:
--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22863/issue11836-default.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11836
New submission from Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr:
multiprocessing.queues.SimpleQueue is undocumented and doesn't appear in
multiprocessing.__all__.
--
assignee: docs@python
components: Documentation, Library (Lib)
keywords: easy
messages: 133586
nosy: docs@python, pitrou
priority:
Changes by Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +eli.bendersky
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11836
___
___
Python-bugs-list
22 matches
Mail list logo
