) and it would be confusing if a
few lines later, a “but you can use them for this” example was provided.
-dancollins34
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 26, 2018, at 1:05 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 9:20 AM, Daniel Collins <d
to submit a
callback function back to the executor.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 26, 2018, at 12:10 PM, Daniel Collins <dancollin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> @Guido: I agree, that’s a much cleaner solution to pass the executor.
> However, I think the last line should be future
nd that's reasonable. But modifying so much code just so the
> Future can know which to executor it belongs so you can make then() a method
> seems overkill.
>
>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Collins <dancollin...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> So, just going poin
t;
>> Also to be honest I don't understand the use case *or* the semantics very
>> well. You have some explaining to do...
>>
>> (Also, full links: https://bugs.python.org/issue32672;
>> https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/5335)
>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 25, 2
*or* the semantics very
> well. You have some explaining to do...
>
> (Also, full links: https://bugs.python.org/issue32672;
> https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/5335)
>
>> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:38 PM, Daniel Collins <dancollin...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
Hello all,
So, first time posting here. I’ve been bothered for a while about the lack of
the ability to chain futures in python, such that the next future will execute
upon the first’s completion. So I submitted a pr to do this. This would add
the .then(self, fn) method to
