On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Josiah Carlson <josiah.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
Twisted core has been proposed, but I believe the consensus was that it wasn't desirable, generally.
I remember only a couple of dissenting voices, and only a small number of participants. Of the dissenting voices, I do not recall any actual arguments about undesireability, just misunderstandings of how Twisted actually works. Getting Twisted core (meaning Deferreds, a simple reactor and the Protocol class) into the core is still on my TODO list. I'm also pretty sure that people learn twisted because everyone learns
twisted. It's one of those buzz-words ;).
I think that's quite an unfair assessment, even in jest :) Twisted is well worth learning to actually use it, as it's a very versatile event loop and does it best to integrate nicely with other event systems. And including it in the standard library improves integration with other event loops by creating a single interface. It's not a matter of dropping it in, though; it requires some careful structuring to avoid embarrassing situations like we have with the xml package, but still people to provide their own reactor. In case you're wondering how the twisted reactor in the stdlib is useful to people not using Twisted, take a look at what you currently need to do to combine stdlib modules like urllib and ftplib with event systems like Tkinter and PyGTK. Not to mention that the Twisted implementations of various protocols are really quite, quite good -- in many cases quite a lot better than the stdlib ones. But including those takes yet more time. -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!