[Python-Dev] [PEP 3148] futures - execute computations asynchronously

Jesse Noller jnoller at gmail.com
Sat Mar 6 23:55:08 CET 2010

On Mar 6, 2010, at 5:47 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python at benfinney.id.au>  

> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:
>> I have to admit Jean-Paul's explanation a pretty convincing reason  
>> for
>> adopting "future" rather than "promise". But I'm with Skip, I would
>> prefer that the module be named "future" rather than "futures".
> Has anyone in this very long thread raised the issue that Python
> *already* uses this term for the name of a module with a totally
> unrelated purpose; the ‘__future__’ pseudo-module?
> That alone seems a pretty strong reason to avoid the word “future”
> (singular or plural) for some other module name.

Yes, they have, and putting it in a sub namespace has also come up. In  
the thread.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list