RetroSearch Browse

Sat Mar 6 13:28:08 CET 2010 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-March/098225.html

Brian Quinlan wrote:
> 
> On 6 Mar 2010, at 08:42, Jesse Noller wrote:
>> If people agree with this; do you feel the proposal of said namespace
>> should be a separate PEP, or piggy back on this? I don't want to piggy
>> back on Brian's hard work.
> 
> It doesn't really matter to me.
> 
> We can either update this PEP to propose the concurrent.futures name or
> you can draft a more complete PEP that describes what other
> functionality should live in the concurrent package.

I think a "concurrent.futures" name works - it gives the scoping desired
by the folks with an finance background and gives us a bucket for future
thread/process agnostic concurrency tools (such as a pools and message
queues).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-March/098225.html below:

[Python-Dev] [PEP 3148] futures - execute computations asynchronously