Re: [stdlib-sig] futures - a new package for asynchronous execution
Anybody here looked at Kamaelia? http://www.kamaelia.org/ I haven't, but wonder if we are considering re-inventing the wheel. Laura
On Nov 7, 2009, at 2:19 PM, Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> wrote:
Anybody here looked at Kamaelia? http://www.kamaelia.org/ I haven't, but wonder if we are considering re-inventing the wheel.
Laura
I have, and no - it's not what we're discussing. Kamaelia is a framework, really. It's also GPL.
Inclusion of kamaelia, or twisted wholesale won't occur any time soon. Jesse
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:36, Jesse Noller <jnoller@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 7, 2009, at 2:19 PM, Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> wrote:
Anybody here looked at Kamaelia? http://www.kamaelia.org/ I haven't, but wonder if we are considering re-inventing the wheel.
Laura
I have, and no - it's not what we're discussing. Kamaelia is a framework, really. It's also GPL.
They also have not stepped forward for inclusion. A point needs to be made that Brian has working code and has come forward to contribute it. It also should be noted that the concepts are extremely simple here as management pools for threads and processes is not hard to grasp (a definitely knock against Twisted as their Deferred approach definitely hurts some peoples' heads no matter how much Antoine loves them =). And especially important, the proposed solution is in pure Python and does not rely exclusively on multiprocessing, thus avoids alienating other VMs beyond CPython.
Inclusion of kamaelia, or twisted wholesale won't occur any time soon.
I would replace "any time soon" with "ever". Both projects are massive and probably don't want to be locked into our development cycle. Both also have their own development teams and culture. Adding a single module or package by a single author is enough challenge as it is, but bringing in another team would be more than challenging. -Brett
They also have not stepped forward for inclusion. A point needs to be made that Brian has working code and has come forward to contribute it.
I do hope that the code and its API get exercised before being included, though. Looking at the Google Code page, the project has only existed since May 2009, and there isn't even a mailing-list. Remember, once we release a Python version with that code in it, we can't change the API very easily.
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 15:02, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
They also have not stepped forward for inclusion. A point needs to be made that Brian has working code and has come forward to contribute it.
I do hope that the code and its API get exercised before being included, though. Looking at the Google Code page, the project has only existed since May 2009, and there isn't even a mailing-list.
That's why we are discussing it now. But as Jesse mentioned, this is simple stuff that he was already planning to add to multiprocessing, so it isn't that radical or controversial of an approach.
Remember, once we release a Python version with that code in it, we can't change the API very easily.
As the author of PEP 3108, I am acutely aware of that fact. =) -Brett
participants (4)
-
Antoine Pitrou -
Brett Cannon -
Jesse Noller -
Laura Creighton