[issue21527] concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor does not use a default value

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 2805b0dca798 by Guido van Rossum in branch 'default': Closes #21527: Add default number of workers to ThreadPoolExecutor. (Claudiu Popa.) http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/2805b0dca798 -- nosy: +python-dev resolution: -> fixed stage: commit

[issue21527] concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor does not use a default value

Claudiu Popa added the comment: Thank you, Guido. -- stage: patch review -> commit review ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue21527] concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor does not use a default value

Guido van Rossum added the comment: Looks good. -- nosy: +gvanrossum ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscr

[issue21527] concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor does not use a default value

Changes by Claudiu Popa : Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file36494/issue21527.patch ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing li

[issue21527] concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor does not use a default value

Changes by Claudiu Popa : -- stage: -> patch review ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://ma

[issue21527] concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor does not use a default value

Josh Rosenberg added the comment: +1. Makes it easier to swap Executors (which is a big selling point for the Executor framework), and number of cores is a reasonable default value. -- nosy: +josh.rosenberg ___ Python tracker

[issue21527] concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor does not use a default value

New submission from Claudiu.Popa: As the title says, ThreadPoolExecutor does not use a default value for max_workers parameter, as ProcessPoolExecutor does. When the user does not care about the number of workers and wants only for something to run in background, he has to write code like this