RetroSearch Browse

Thu Jun 5 17:10:41 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-June/080065.html

On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jesse Noller wrote:
>>
>> However, the flip side of this is that no one really "likes" the
>> threading API as-is, so putting the module into the standard library
>> with the matching API simply adds another "broken" API.
>
> Provided threading gets a PEP 8 style API in 2.6 (which it looks like it is
> going to), then I don't see a problem with multiprocessing only providing
> the new API.
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>

Fantastic. If no one has any other arguments to the contrary, I'll run
with the new API naming scheme.

Now I have a lot of tests and documentation to rewrite.

-jesse

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-June/080065.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 371: Additional Discussion