On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 5:01 AM Sean Harrington <seanharr11 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I like the idea to extend the Pool class [to optimize the case when only
> one function is passed to the workers].
>
Why would this keep the same interface as the Pool class? If its workers
are restricted to calling only one function, that should be passed into the
Pool constructor. The map and apply methods would then only receive that
function's args and not the function itself. You're also trying to avoid
the initializer/globals pattern, so you could eliminate that parameter from
the Pool constructor. In fact, it sounds more like you'd want a function
than a class. You can call it "procmap" or similar. That's code I've
written more than once.
results = poolmap(func, iterable, processes=cpu_count())
The nuance is that, since there's no explicit context manager, you'll want
to ensure the pool is shut down after all the tasks are finished, even if
the results generator hasn't been fully consumed.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20181019/1e3d63d7/attachment.html>
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