On 28 May 2010, at 09:18, Greg Ewing wrote:
Brian Quinlan wrote:
I think that the "Executor" suffix is a good indicator of the
interface being provided.
It's not usually considered necessary for the name of a
type to indicate its interface. We don't have 'listsequence'
and 'dictmapping' for example.
I think what bothers me most about these names is their
longwindedness. Two parts to a name is okay, but three or
more starts to sound pedantic. And for me, "Pool" is a
more important piece of information than "Executor".
The fact that it manages a pool is the main reason I'd
use such a module rather than just spawning a thread myself
for each task.
Actually, an executor implementation that created a new thread per
task would still be useful - it would save you the hassle of
developing a mechanism to wait for the thread to finish and to collect
the results. We actually have such an implementation at Google and it
is quite popular.
Cheers,
Brian
_______________________________________________
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
