17 Oct
2012
17 Oct
'12
6:38 a.m.
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Greg Ewing greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
The important idea is that just because you spawn a task, it doesn't necessarily follow that you want to be regarded as the *parent* of that task and receive its exceptions.
Maybe. But the opposite doesn't follow either. It's a toss-up between the spawner and the waiter.
So maybe spawn() should have an option indicating that the spawning task is to receive exceptions occuring in the spawned task.
--
Greg