>> I'm +1 on adding a nice task queuing system, -1 on calling it by any >> other name. ;-) Nick> As Guido said, let's call the nice task queuing system "futures" Nick> and point people wanting a full-power asynchronous process model Nick> to Twisted
Can this module at least be pushed down into a package? I think "concurrent" or "concurrency" were both suggested at one point.
Yep, I believe "concurrent.futures" was picked as the name elsewhere in the thread.