RetroSearch Browse

Tue Aug 3 19:27:56 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/046744.html

Peter Astrand wrote:

>>I believe ActiveState's Trent Mick has released something along these
>>lines.  Does your proposed API match theirs?

[...]

> So, the chances of getting our modules API-compatible are very small.

I really don't want to get into a religious war about the relative 
benefits of the two modules (I don't know Peter's well enough to 
comment), but I think it would be nice for users if there weren't two 
modules with the same goal, different interfaces and the same _name_.  I 
understand from Trent that Twisted has started to use his process.py, so 
having another process.py in the stdlib at some point would cause at 
least some users pain.

--david

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/046744.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 324 (process module)