> John Camera writes: > > It sounds like he feels Queue should just be part of threading but queues > > can be used in other contexts besides threading. So having separate > > modules is a good thing. > > Michael Chermside > Perhaps I am wrong here, but the Queue.Queue class is designed specifically > for synchronization, and I have always been under the impression that > it was probably NOT the best tool for normal queues that have nothing > to do with threading. Why incur the overhead of synchronization locks > when you don't intend to use them. I would advise against using Queue.Queue > in any context besides threading.
I haven't used the Queue class before as I normally use a list for a queue. I just assumed a Queue was just a queue that was perhaps optimized for performance. I guess I would have expected the Queue class as defined in the standard library to have a different name if it wasn't just a queue. Well I should have known better than to make assumption on this list. :) I now see where Greg is coming from but I'm still not comfortable having it in the threading module. To me threads and queues are two different beasts. John M. Camara _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
