[Python-Dev] microthreading vs. async io (original) (raw)

Adam Olsen rhamph at gmail.com
Thu Feb 15 18:33:42 CET 2007

On 2/15/07, Joachim König-Baltes <joachim.koenig-baltes at emesgarten.de> wrote:

Adam Olsen schrieb: > I don't think we're on the same page then. The way I see it you want > a single async IO implementation shared by everything while having a > collection of event loops that cooperate "just enough". The async IO > itself would likely end up being done in C. > No, I'd like to have:

- An interface for a task to specifiy the events it's interested in, and waiting for at least one of the events (with a timeout). - an interface for creating a task (similar to creating a thread) - an interface for a schedular to manage the tasks

My tasks are transient and only wait on one thing at a time (if not waiting for the scheduler to let them run!). I have my own semantics for creating tasks that incorporate exception propagation. My exception propagation (and return handling) require a scheduler with specific support for them. Net result is that I'd have to wrap all you provide, if not monkey-patching it because it doesn't provide the interfaces to let me wrap it properly.

All I want is a global select.poll() object that all the event loops can hook into and each will get a turn to run after each call.

Well, that, plus I want it to work around all the platform-specific peculiarities.

-- Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list