> What Im getting at is that a Python IO model should maybe go a little
> further than "tradtional" IO - asynchronous IO and synchronisation
> capabilities should also be specified. Of course, these would be optional,
> but it would be excellent if a platform could easily slot into pre-defined
> Python semantics if possible.
What Python could do with reasonable ease is a sort of "promise" model, where
an I/O operation returns an object that waits for the I/O to complete upon
access or destruction.
Something like
def foo():
obj = stdin.delayed_read()
obj2 = stdout.delayed_write("data")
do_lengthy_computation()
data = obj.get() # Here we wait for the read to complete
del obj2 # Here we wait for the write to complete.
This gives a fairly nice programming model.
--
Jack Jansen | ++++ stop the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal ++++
Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com | ++++ if you agree copy these lines to your sig ++++
www.oratrix.nl/~jack | see http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4