[Python-Dev] [PEP 3148] futures - execute computations asynchronously (original) (raw)

Ben Finney ben+python at benfinney.id.au
Sat Mar 6 23:47:57 CET 2010

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:

I have to admit Jean-Paul's explanation a pretty convincing reason for adopting "future" rather than "promise". But I'm with Skip, I would prefer that the module be named "future" rather than "futures".

Has anyone in this very long thread raised the issue that Python already uses this term for the name of a module with a totally unrelated purpose; the ‘__future__’ pseudo-module?

That alone seems a pretty strong reason to avoid the word “future” (singular or plural) for some other module name.

-- \ “Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as | `\ society is free to use the results.” —Richard Stallman | o_) | Ben Finney

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list