[Python-Dev] PEP 3148 ready for pronouncement (original) (raw)

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Thu May 27 17:55:21 CEST 2010

On 27/05/10 12:29, Greg Ewing wrote:

On 27/05/10 01:48, Nick Coghlan wrote:

I would say it is precisely that extra configurability which separates the executor pools in the PEP implementation from more flexible general purpose pools. Wouldn't this be better addressed by adding the relevant options to the futures pools, rather than adding another module that provides almost exactly the same thing with different options?

It would depend on the details, but my instinct says no (instead, the futures pools would be refactored to be task specific tailorings of the general purpose pools).

However, this is all very hypothetical at this point and not really relevant to the PEP review. We may never even bother creating these more general purpose threading pools - it was just an example of the kind of thing that may go alongside the futures module.

Cheers, Nick.

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

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list