On Dec 9, 2010, at 4:26 AM, Thomas Nagy wrote: > Hello, > > I am looking forward to replacing a piece of code (http://code.google.com/p/waf/source/browse/trunk/waflib/Runner.py#86 > ) by the futures module which was announced in python 3.2 beta. I am > a bit stuck with it, so I have a few questions about the futures: > > 1. Is the futures API frozen? Yes. > 2. How hard would it be to return the tasks processed in an output > queue to process/consume the results while they are returned? The > code does not seem to be very open for monkey patching. You can associate a callback with a submitted future. That callback could add the future to your queue. > 3. How hard would it be to add new tasks dynamically (after a task > is executed) and have the futures object never complete? I'm not sure that I understand your question. You can submit new work to an Executor at until time until it is shutdown and a work item can take as long to complete as you want. If you are contemplating tasks that don't complete then maybe you could be better just scheduling a thread. > 4. Is there a performance evaluation of the futures code (execution > overhead) ? No. Scott Dial did make some performance improvements so he might have a handle on its overhead. Cheers, Brian > Thanks, > Thomas > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/brian%40sweetapp.com
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