[issue995907] memory leak with threads and enhancement of the timer class

[Charles-François Natali]

Charles-François Natali added the comment:

IMO, this shouldn't be implemented atop thread, but ought to be a regular thread pool: this way, you won't get behind if some task takes too long to execute, the thread pool can start new threads as needed, and we get the general work submit/cancel (through future) for free.
Also, it would probably deserve a new interface in concurrent.futures, as ScheduledExecutor, with new schedule(delay, fn, *args, **kwargs) and schedule_periodic(delay, fn, *args, **kwargs) for one-shot and periodic calls.

It would be much more consistant than an ad-hoc implementation in the threading module.

----------
nosy: +neologix

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue995907>
_______________________________________