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

exarkun at twistedmatrix.com exarkun at twistedmatrix.com
Sun Mar 7 03:34:54 CET 2010

On 02:10 am, brian at sweetapp.com wrote:
>On 7 Mar 2010, at 03:04, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>At 05:32 AM 3/6/2010, Brian Quinlan wrote:
>>>Using twisted (or any other asynchronous I/O framework) forces you to
>>>rewrite your I/O code. Futures do not.
>>Twisted's "Deferred" API has nothing to do with I/O.
>I see, you just mean the API and not the underlying model.
>We discussed the Deferred API on the stdlib-sig and I don't think that 
>anyone expressed a preference for it over the one described in the PEP.
>Do you have any concrete criticism?

 From reading some of the stdlib-sig archives, it sounds like there is 
general agreement that Deferreds and Futures can be used to complement 
each other, and that getting code that is primarily Deferred-based to 
integrate with Future-based code or vice versa should eventually be 

Do I have the right sense of people's feelings?

And relatedly, once Futures are accepted and implemented, are people 
going to use them as an argument to exclude Deferreds from the stdlib 
(or be swayed by other people making such arguments)?  Hopefully not, 
given what I read on stdlib-sig, but it doesn't hurt to check...


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list